It's an interesting duality of engineers - love the coding challenges when they are the ones evaluating, while refuse to do them themselves :)
Some people think it's OK to ask the candidate to dedicate 2 hours, then send an automated email rejecting. I don't think this is polite, let alone respectful.
At least have the decency to dedicate 10 minutes to writing down three bullet points for why they were rejected.
There are differences between "code this weird thing on a whiteboard" and "show us some code that you're not terribly embarassed about" (instead of searching on github)...
I once got sent an automated email after applying to an org with a coding challenge before the first filter. Before even any recruiter/HM or anyone actually at the organization sent me an email acknowledging they received my application.
I initially bristled, and reached out to the generic "recruiting@" email that was present in the HackerRank email for the company, asking if I could at least have a screening call at minimum before committing time to a coding assessment.
They said no.
In the position of "needing work yesterday", I did the challenge.
And was promptly ghosted.
- Short and fully automated, for instance to skip an initial technical screening;
- Longer, but leading to a follow-up interview.
It's a tool, it can be misused. Be respectful and both parties can benefit from it.
It's like whiteboarding: I don't enjoy companies that expect me to have seen the problem already and regurgitate the answer, but it can be a pleasant experience too.