A co-parenting coordination platform, and the one company here that does not fit the thesis. That is the honest description of it.
Civly is a co-parenting coordination platform. It handles the logistics that two separated parents have to manage between them: the schedule, shared expenses, and a record of what was agreed.
Because I co-founded it, and leaving it off would be a tidier story than a true one.
It shares nothing with the other three companies. Different customer, different regulatory perimeter, different technology, different everything. Retrofitting it into a unified thesis would be a narrative rather than a reason.
What it shares is the shape of the problem, not the domain. Two parties who have to coordinate, high friction in the coordination, and a record that matters later.
Most software has one user per account whose interests point the same direction. A co-parenting platform has two users on the same account whose interests are frequently opposed, and often at the worst point in either of their lives.
That is a genuine design constraint rather than an edge case, and it changes what a good product looks like. Features that would be obviously correct in any other tool are not obviously correct here.
Nothing about the product is legal advice, and it does not promise anything about how a court will treat anything. Those are outcomes we do not control and would be wrong to imply.
Safety is a design problem rather than a disclaimer. A tool like this is used inside situations where one party is being monitored or harassed, and that has to be designed for rather than mentioned in the terms.
Co-founder. The product is at civly.co, and anything about how it works belongs there.