Appreciate the feedback. We are not currently a good fit for highly-regulated industries like gov't or medical, though we are working to meet those requirements. We currently run Hyper on our (cloud) infra because it's far and away the lowest-friction option for teams that are comfortable with it. Understand that it's not for everyone, and our security and compliance posturing will mature with time and iteration (we are a very new company!).
> We are not currently a good fit for highly-regulated industries like gov't or medical, though we are working to meet those requirements.
What you just wrote is better than what the FAQ says:
"If your organization has high security requirements, please talk to us."
Which is why I took time to talk to you. You should say, in the FAQ, you are today a best fit for open/transparent teams without information boundaries, but would like to learn more about those needs from firms both wanting a company brain and required to partition it.
Just to be clear: gov and medical are the same needs as non-regulated industries, meaning, every enterprise needs information boundaries. It's just that gov and med have extra regulators checking them. Thinking those are the only two mean you're overlooking a ton of firms that have the need as well. (Who should see comp? Who should see prospect deal strategy? Who should see cap tables? Etc.)
> our security and compliance posturing will mature with time and iteration
"security posture" (as in stance) not "security posturing" (as in pretending)
