I've found the approach to privacy to be extremely different in my country and the US - people don't see any issue with pasting their identities, linking them to DNA tests and so on.
I'd respond that the evaluation is done after feedback from all interviewers is gathered and reviewed, and I can't comment on anything at the moment - there were a number of post-interview discussions where my opinion and opinions of other interviewers were different, sometimes slightly (we overlooked some additional evidence), sometimes substantially (e.g. no hire vs hire)
There were two things in your post that I'd like to highlight:
- they decided to have this session, but via a call, not e-mail - it's psychologically safer this way for the hiring manager who might be doing that against company guidelines
- you passively listened to the feedback - that's the way, DO NOT try to argue - it's extremely unlikely to benefit anyone
Oh yes. Absolutely. Sit and listen to the feedback. If you do not agree with it, DO NOT ARGUE!! (for context, I agreed with 80% of the feedback. The 20% I did not agree with, I did not argue, just made a mental note to be better at explaining myself in the future).
Impossible to tell without knowing more. For our recent entry-level opening we could offer an interview to about 5-10% of applicants due to the volume of applications, generic "I've done a bootcamp/I have a degree" resumes in general did not fare well.
I don't see how this follows. There are many orders of magnitude of companies I would like to work for that use JS, than those which use Elixir. Many more openings per day, in many different places.
Restaurant A has 10 seats and 5 customers who just bought a meal and want to dine there.
Restaurant B has 20 seats and 50 customers who just bought a meal and want to dine there.
Which will be easier for you to get a seat in? The answer is Restaurant A, even though it has a smaller supply of seats. This is because supply and demand both matter!
