Our Formal Response To Dave Obinna's
False Claims Regarding Our Hiring Process

Published on: April 20, 2025

On April 20, 2025, we were informed that an individual identifying as "Dave Obinna" has publicly accused our company of being a "job farming" scam operation in a LinkedIn comment:

In his comment, he described our organization as "sick" and claimed that we offered to pay $300 for some "assignment" but then did not pay. He has also made allegations regarding our interviewing process, and described our CEO as a "stupid guy".

We take our company's reputation seriously and it is our priority to provide factual responses to any defamatory claims made against our company. As such, we find it important to provide a factual account of what really happened.

Our team has investigated the allegations and reviewed the facts of the case.

When considering any claim, it is important to consider the source. Who is the individual behind this LinkedIn post? Dave Obinna is a verified LinkedIn profile, so it is reasonable to deduce that he is a real person. A further investigation of records has revealed that Dave Obinna may also go by names "David Obinna" and "Dave Obi".

Our investigation has revealed that David Obinna has, indeed, applied for the Software Design Engineer job at Elite Software Automation on February 6, 2025 where he stated his full name as "Dave Obi".

On February 6, 2025, Dave Obinna submitted an application for the Software Design Engineer position at Elite Software Automation. Upon submitting his application form, he was invited to complete his online pre-screening test, which he completed later that day. It is important to note that he was never promised any payment for the online pre-screening test. The online pre-screening tests at Elite Software Automation are short tests that are designed to pre-qualify the candidate for further evaluations in the hiring process and have never been advertised as paid assignments.

The online pre-screening test contains two parts: one part is an automatically graded part where the candidate has to answer to short questions with either multiple-choice or coding questions; another part is a manually graded text question. The candidates are informed of the test structure in advance of taking the test.

Dave Obinna has taken his test on February 6, 2025 and has taken a total of 35 minutes to take his entire test. He scored an 81% score on his automatically graded part of the online test. Following this, his manually graded portion of the test was reviewed.

In the manually graded portion, he was asked to explain his understanding of the job that he applied for in the company and was given up to 15 minutes to respond to this question. He was specifically instructed to provide a highly detailed answer to the question and was informed that any surface level answers will not lead to a successful progress of his application. However, in his actual answer, that he took less than 6 minutes to provide, Dave Obinna replied with an extremely surface level response that did not reflect any in-depth details of the job:

It was worth noting that prior to taking the test, the candidate was provided with a detailed text description of the job as well as a detailed video where specific processes and expectations were provided. As such, it was very reasonable for our company's recruiting team to expect highly detailed answers to this question. Dave Obinna's answer was not only informal in tone but was also extremely surface level. As result of this, our recruiting team has concluded that Dave Obinna has failed the manual portion of his pre-screening online test. He was emailed an official rejection notice the same day.

It was worth noting that prior to taking the test, the candidate was provided with a detailed text description of the job as well as a detailed video where specific processes and expectations were provided. As such, it was very reasonable for our company's recruiting team to expect highly detailed answers to this question. Dave Obinna's answer was not only informal in tone but was also extremely surface level. As result of this, our recruiting team has concluded that Dave Obinna has failed the manual portion of his pre-screening online test. He was emailed an official rejection notice the same day.

Almost immediately upon receiving the rejection notice, David Obinna has replied with an angry email filled with profanities and threats:

As can be seen below, the email that David Obinna has replied with was extremely unprofessional and uncalled for. Despite the fact that our rejection notice has detailed out a thorough response and explanation of why his response was insufficient. Nonetheless, David Obinna has chosen to reply with a profane and threatening reply. We have partially redacted his email address for privacy.

Our team has then attempted to reply to David Obinna's email, attempting to provide some clarity to his response and hopefully provide some closure. Our response was very professional and to the point:

Following that, David Obinna has replied with another email filled with profanities:

In this emotional response, David Obinna has accused us of "abuse" of his talent and suggested that we did not provide him a clear specification to the job description. Let's consider these claims in more detail.

It is unclear what exactly David Obinna's definition of "abuse" is. His online test took him 35 minutes and he was able to take the test at his convenience, with no specific deadlines or waiting periods imposed. He was clearly informed that this was a pre-screening test and was not promised anything other than having his job application reviewed by Elite Software Automation's management, which was successfully completed on February 6, 2025, the same day he applied.

As such, David Obinna's claim of "abuse" is false.

David Obinna applied for the Software Design Engineer position within Elite Software Automation. As per our official job site's description, this position's official job description contains a total of 3,147 words, which any reasonable person would concur with being a detailed and thorough job description. In addition to that, prior to taking his online test, David Obinna was shown a video that detailed out specific processes and expectations associated with the role with a total duration of 17 minutes and 29 seconds, see the exact web page that followed his initial application form below:

In fact, as you can see, David Obinna was clearly instructed to watch the video in full before proceeding to the online test, and he was also encouraged to consider whether he really wants this job or not before proceeding further.

If David Obinna did not want to pay sufficient attention to the text job description or the video description of the job, and insisted on proceeding to the next step regardless, then it is entirely his responsibility. As far as all reasonable measures that our company could take, we have provided him with more than enough detail to be able to provide a thorough response to our question.

As such, David Obinna's claim of unclear specification is false.

On April 20, 2025, Dave Obinna has posted a comment on LinkedIn making severe allegations against Elite Software Automation:

No, Dave Obinna was never invited to any paid assignment process. As demonstrated above, his application has been rejected in early phases of hiring process. Additionally, his unprofessional and profane emails have led to his profile being added to a "do not hire" list within Elite Software Automation's internal systems. As such, Dave Obinna has never been invited to a paid assignment process within Elite Software Automation's hiring process.

Dave Obinna's claim is false.

No, Dave Obinna has never been invited to Elite Software Automation's interview as his application was rejected in earlier hiring process steps, and he has been included in the official "do not hire" list by the company, following his unprofessional and profane emails.

Dave Obinna's claim is false.

Elite Software Automation does offer practical assignments to certain candidates who successfully move forward to advanced stages of its hiring process, and there may be an earned consideration involved with these assignments.

We again clarify that Dave Obinna was never given any practical assignment. The following describes stages of the Elite Software Automation hiring process that Dave Obinna himself was never able to reach.

It is worth noting that these test assignments are given with strict requirements and conditions that will be required in order for them to be eligible for payment of any consideration. Each assignment states that the candidate may be able to earn a consideration up to a certain amount if requirements are determined to be met during Elite Software Automation's review of the assignment submission. The assignment features a clear criteria detailing out what will qualify for consideration. All candidates invited into the assignment are informed that submissions of assignments with bugs, major issues, missed requirements, or any other major problems will not be eligible for any consideration payment. Additionally, it is clearly stated to each candidate in writing that all decisions regarding the assignment review will be reserved strictly to Elite Software Automation's expert review and that the candidate agrees with the terms of the assignment by participating in the assignment process. Below is an example of a sample consideration policy included in one of the Elite Software Automation's test assignment:

As it can be clearly seen, the rules of the consideration policy are very clear and at no point does Elite Software Automation attempt to claim that the candidate is unconditionally entitled to any consideration, and it is in fact clearly stated to any candidate invited to the practical test assignment process what the terms of the assignment process are. If any candidate does not agree with these terms, they are under no obligation to participate in the process. Any candidate submitting a response agrees to the rules of the assignment and agrees to ESA's discretion over the assignment review. To date, no credible complaints exist of ESA violating the consideration policy in its test assignment process.

Dave Obinna has alleged that the company engages in "job farming". Let's evaluate this claim for credibility.

Elite Software Automation's business involves delivering comprehensive and highly detailed business automation solutions to its clients. As can be noted in ESA's client testimonials featured on its website, these solutions are reported as being highly detailed and very custom to each client.

Making any such solutions would require highly detailed efforts comprising multidisciplinary efforts across various expert roles within Elite Software Automation in a collaborative and iterative process.

No, there is no credible possibility in which ESA can be producing its solutions to clients using a "job farming" scam operation.

At first, there is no way that the large amount of context can reliably be packed into a test assignment process that would in any way produce a workable client solution. The need for these solutions to be iterated within a multidisciplinary context is also impossible to meet within any test assignment process.

On top of that, the test assignment process and the hiring process in general has its own costs of operation, and considering the fact that there can never be consistent quality when test assignments are produced by various job candidates, not previously vetted, it would be extremely counterproductive and financially unsound for Elite Software Automation to attempt producing any of its client solutions using any alleged "job farming" schemes.

Therefore, Dave Obinna's claim of "job farming" is false.

The reason why Elite Software Automation, and many other companies, have practical take-home assignments in their hiring process is to evaluate a candidate's real ability to perform tasks on the job. Many candidates can look great on paper and have amazing resumes by the simple virtue of hiring a resume writer, or using an AI tool to create a great resume.

It is almost impossible for a prospective employer to verify the claims the candidate made on the resume. It is not uncommon for candidates to exaggerate their claimed past achievements on the resume, and there aren't reliable ways for employers to verify them.

However, when giving a candidate a real sample of work to perform, it is possible to gauge the candidate's real ability in a practical context, which makes practical assignments an invaluable tool to separate candidates who are actually capable to produce results from candidates who are only good at making impressive claims.

Whether practical test assignments are ethical or not depends on whether the hiring company clearly communicates expectations to candidates.

In the case of Elite Software Automation's assignment process, candidates are clearly informed of the rules of the process in the initial test assignment document. ESA then follows through on its assignment process and gives each candidate clear responses upon its evaluation. Therefore, Elite Software Automation's test assignment process is in full compliance with ordinary ethical and contractual expectations of a hiring process.

No, the claims made by Dave Obinna in his LinkedIn comment are demonstrably false.

Dave Obinna has never been invited into any part of the company's hiring process beyond the initial screening test. As such any claims made in his post are false.

Judging by Dave Obinna's unprofessional and emotional response to his rejection notice, it appears that Dave Obinna is likely a bitter candidate who suffered an emotional breakdown upon learning of his rejection and has decided to embark on a campaign of lies, false claims, and defamation against the company.

At Elite Software Automation, we are committed to safeguarding the privacy of all candidates. We treat every job application with the highest degree of confidentiality and do not disclose any individual’s details under ordinary circumstances.

However, due to a series of public statements made by Dave Obinna—including false and defamatory claims alleging illegal conduct on our part—we were compelled to issue this public rebuttal to clarify the facts and protect the integrity of our company.

Prior to publishing this response, we explicitly informed Mr. Obinna that any such false public claims would result in an official clarification. Despite that warning, he chose to publish accusations that misrepresent our hiring process and impugn our character.

We have since reached out privately and expressed that we are willing to unpublish our rebuttal immediately, should Mr. Obinna remove his original post and acknowledge its inaccuracy. Our intention is not to harm anyone’s career or reputation, and we are committed to resolving this matter professionally.

However, as long as the original post remains public and contains misinformation about our company and its practices, we believe it is necessary to provide factual context so that others are not misled.

– Team at Elite Software Automation

April 21, 2025

Since the publication of this formal rebuttal, Dave Obinna has continued to make additional public statements regarding Elite Software Automation’s hiring process. In the course of doing so, Dave Obinna publicly admitted in a LinkedIn comment that he had assisted other candidates in cheating on ESA’s live technical pre-screening test.

Shortly after this admission was pointed out by a current Elite Software Automation employee in the same discussion thread, Dave Obinna edited the original comment, which now appears publicly as “edited” on LinkedIn. We retained unaltered screenshot of the original version for documentation purposes, shown below:

Here is the response by Elite Software Automation's current employee, pointing out the apparent admission:

Now Dave Obinna has edited the comment, even though he still maintains that he "gave them clues on passing your live coding" and "one of them passed the live coding under my guidance", clearly indicating that Dave Obinna helped another person cheat on his live coding pre-screening test with Elite Software Automation:

He has then attempted to reverse his statement with another comment, in which he downplayed his involvement as merely telling other candidates "what to expect", however, even if this update to his statement is to be believed, telling another person what question is to be expected on the exam is equivalent to helping the person cheat on the exam:

As seen above, Dave Obinna further claimed that some of the individuals he assisted reached ESA’s test assignment stage but were not paid for allegedly completing their assignments. However, as an ESA employee correctly pointed out, candidates who are unable to pass the live screening test without assistance are extremely unlikely to meet the technical standards required for assignment compensation.

As clearly stated in our original rebuttal — and visually documented via a screenshot of the official terms from our test assignment instructions — the following conditions apply:

1. The test assignment stage is offered only to selected candidates following successful pre-screening and interview.

2. Participation is entirely voluntary and requires prior review of the assignment instructions document (referenced in our original rebuttal above).

3. That document contains an explicit statement that: "Upon us reviewing the assignment, you may be entitled to consideration as defined below, depending on the condition of your assignment response. Elite Software Automation's expert review of the assignment will be the determinant of how your assignment response condition is assessed. [...] Your consideration will be $300 if you submit deliverables for both tasks in this assignment, and for each task, the deliverables get verified upon QA testing to meet all listed requirements in full, with no more than 3 very minor issues present in the assignment, as determined through QA review by ESA. [...] Your consideration will be $0 if you fail to successfully submit such deliverables, or if your deliverables will contain any major quality issues that will prevent proper functionality of such deliverables, or if they will contain more than 3 minor issues, as determined through QA review by ESA. [...] By submitting the assignment response, you certify that you understand the above Consideration Policy, agree with its rules, and that you agree that the compensation provided is fair, valuable, and reasonable given the circumstances of this test assignment."

Participation in the test assignment constitutes acceptance of these terms, which are communicated clearly and upfront, including the agreement to accept ESA's full discretion over the review process. Any claims of unpaid work by candidates who did not meet the outlined requirements are entirely without merit. The fact that no alleged candidate directly came forward with any such claims is further sign that no legitimate claims exist.

This sequence — including the public cheating admission, the attempt to downplay the admission, and the repetition of baseless accusations — further discredits Dave Obinna’s claims and motives. Elite Software Automation remains committed to upholding the integrity of its hiring process and protecting its reputation through documented transparency and factual accountability.

At Elite Software Automation, we respect every candidate who applies sincerely and honestly. We hold ourselves — and those we hire — to high standards. When our integrity is publicly attacked through false and malicious claims, we will always respond with facts, documentation, and clarity.

We remain committed to providing a transparent, merit-based hiring experience. We encourage all candidates to carefully review our process expectations and engage with us in good faith. Those who do will be met with professionalism and respect. Those who don’t should expect the same clarity we’ve demonstrated here.

Copyright © Elite Software Automation 2025. All Rights Reserved.