The candidate's interviewer left the room three separate times to answer a phone call, and did not excuse herself on any of the three occasions. The candidate stayed and finished the interview.
The post was written as a reply to another account of the same behaviour, which is the part the candidate emphasised: not one unusual interviewer, but a recurring one. Three departures, no apology attached to any of them.
What the candidate took from it was not a verdict on the role but on the office. They wrote that they knew then the workspace was going to be toxic — a judgement formed during the interview, and from the person conducting it, before any question of an offer arose.
The outcome of the process is not stated.