Leaving aside the question of whether such questions have a value for interviews in the first place, I want to talk about how awesome they are.<p>I scrolled down to a language I know and picked a random link: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.careerride.com&#x2F;C++-Interview-questions-Answer.aspx" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.careerride.com&#x2F;C++-Interview-questions-Answer.asp...</a><p>Those are inane multiple-choice questions written in broken English, the included answers explain neither why a choice is correct nor why the others are incorrect. The difficulty level is very low. There are few interesting open-ended questions, like &quot;How should errors be handled in C++ ?&quot; but the suggested answers are below anything a competent interviewee would say. I can see no reason why this specific link should be included in a &quot;curated list of awesome&quot;.<p>MaximAbramchuck slapped the &quot;Awesome&quot; badge on that list. He even linked to the Awesome manifesto. Does MaximAbramchuck personally recommend the above link as an awesome list of C++ questions? Really?<p>And why? The Awesome manifesto requires curators to provide an explanation, to argue in favor of each item&#x27;s inclusion. MaximAbramchuck, if you&#x27;re reading this, why do you think this link is awesome?