I’ve been following recent product updates and can see the steady progress you’ve made on client-facing portal capabilities. Those improvements are clearly meaningful for external collaboration and the overall customer experience.

In parallel, I’d like to encourage the team to maintain (and ideally increase) investment in FuseBase’s core knowledge management and automation features. For many teams—including long-term, high-usage customers—FuseBase isn’t only a portal layer; it’s the central knowledge system and the operational foundation that supports day-to-day execution.

Strengthening areas like structured knowledge architecture, workflow automation, and deeper system integrations would materially raise FuseBase’s value for advanced users and teams building scalable, repeatable processes.

One additional point I hope you’ll consider: product direction shouldn’t prioritize only one segment’s needs at the expense of another. If development momentum focuses primarily on portal features, it risks overlooking loyal customers who depend on strong knowledge management and automation to run their operations effectively. A more balanced roadmap that serves both external collaboration and internal operational use cases would better reflect the breadth of FuseBase’s user base.

I also need to be direct about a serious communication problem: emails I sent to two different FuseBase email addresses both bounced back. That raises a straightforward question—do you actually want to receive and handle user issues at all? If your published support channels aren’t reachable, it’s impossible for customers to report problems or provide feedback in a productive way. Please clarify the correct, working contact method and ensure it is monitored.

I’m looking forward to seeing how FuseBase evolves in the coming releases.