To dig a bit on this, setting up the review itself isn't trivial. I felt we were just applying different biases, which could be fine, but it also wasn't catching up internally.

For instance I personally use and abuse the online GitHub/gitlab interface a lot and am extremely familiar with both. But looking at my colleagues, many do code reviews locally, diffing in their IDE.

Some also don't navigate the code the same way and tend to work "bottom up" instead of "top down", which puts them at a disadvantage in time limited settings when they might be better reviewers in general.

Referring to the other comment wishing to get full A3 printout to look at the code, we also had a guy who used his personal laptop to interview and felt lost as he usually reviews code on his giant work screen.

Having the candidate choose could be the best of both worlds, but that' a lot more work on the interviewing side.