that only make sense if the test question is related to the position.

if you intend to broaden up those question, do that in verbal/face to face.
question like what make the king of programmer

don't lum-sum anything to a test paper.
if you intend to use that at 1st filter, do it intelligently.

question about "king of programmer" in test paper, its a joke.

really, if the test really pissed you off, the company is so and so.
you may find the environment on your 1st inspection quite good, but with that kind of test questions, you can guess more of less the so-call pro/senior is what level.

you may work in a good environment, but can you stand moron?

if no, then forget them.

Well that's very nice of you.
Here's my thoughts on tests - from an employers POV.

A test is a way of filtering large number of applicants down to a manageable number to interview. As such the questions try and focus on key areas the hiring manager requires. Some might be happy with a generic <insert language here> test, however we (and others) focus on certain aspects that we require *as a baseline*.
Test questions might be anything from fundamental principles (eg. logic), to API knowledge, to general knowledge.

But they do just provide a filter. Sometimes you get false positives (unsuitable applicant passes), sometimes you get false negatives (suitable applicant fails). Although this can seem (and indeed is) personal to the applicant, it is just a game of numbers to the hirer.

As an example I've got through 1,400 CVs in the past 12 months. If I'd have reviewed each CV properly it would have taken nearly 8 months work. To interview, would taken that up to 23.5 months.

The message I'm trying to get across is that you should not consider a fail at any particular test or interview for *any* company a personal thing.

The company will be looking for *suitable* employees - this doesnt just mean skills, it can mean personal attitude, team work, culture, language, etc etc. Some companies might even hire based on a willingness to work 12hr days 6 days a week (not me though!).

Just some thoughts from someone who's done a lot of interviewing and also been an interviewee a lot (I'm from a technical background - if you want to see my history then it's here )

mbc

I guess you should be one of management or the person who took the test.

I do find a problem with the the word "king" of programmers though...  What if my favourite programmer is... Ada Lovelace?

btw,

there is some weird problem going on with your interview.
why would someone failed the test need to go to another interview?