Fireflies Signals
What leaders and teams rolling out Fireflies report, with every finding tied to its evidence.
Read the findingsWhat the evidence says
Practitioner sentiment, leaders and teams
+6 Mixed from 36 sources that take a side
How this figure is madeMixed overall signal, net 6 points
From 36 authors in 23 discussions. Run a pilot on a month of real meetings to measure how much each summary needs editing before it is shared.
- Analyzed
- 84 total sources
- Top praise
- Notes & Action Items (8 of 8 sources) See praise evidence
- Top concern
- Bot Control & Privacy (17 of 22 sources) See concern evidence
Jan 2025 to Oct 2026.
63 sources from practitioners, by month and sentiment.
Team and IT accounts split almost evenly. Teams that run Fireflies praise note quality, the searchable record, and integrations: Runlayer feeds customer calls into its agent pipeline, and a SaaS founder's agent reads calls through MCP. IT administrators raise the bot most: it adds itself to calendars, emails recaps to every invitee, and keeps joining meetings after the app is blocked. Six universities restrict it, and Case Western Reserve and Virginia Tech block it campus-wide. A community college points its faculty to Zoom's built-in AI, then branded AI Companion, instead.
Positive, mixed and negative sources
The score counts each source once, as the split does. See How the numbers work.
See the evidenceBelow: 3 praise themes, 1 concern and 1 point of agreement.
Findings
Counted for Leaders and teams rolling it out, from 37 sources. Change group
What practitioners praise
Every capability practitioners describe positively, ranked by how many sources say so. Open one to read who said it.
Notes & Action ItemsAll 8 sources on it praise itHow accurate and usable the transcripts, summaries, and action items are.
Counted for Leaders and teams rolling it out.
Positive
Zahra Miller, Managing Partner, EvaluCore Consulting (1-10 employees)
Fireflies.ai review on TrustRadiusTrustRadius review (incentivized)
EvaluCore records internal and client meetings and auto-shares summaries with attendees; Miller counts 156 meetings in 2025 and finds accuracy drops for in-person recordings.
Positive
Kapil Amarnani, Business Development Manager, SoftwareSuggest (11-50 employees)
Fireflies.ai review on TrustRadiusTrustRadius review (incentivized)
Amarnani's sales team records every sales meeting, builds agent reports from the transcripts, and estimates 2 to 3 hours saved per agent a week. Hindi is not recognized and the bot sometimes joins late.
Positive
Maria Sergeeva, UX and Content Designer, Career Pathway Institute (51-200 employees)
Fireflies.ai review on TrustRadiusTrustRadius review (incentivized)
Career Pathway Institute uses Fireflies so nobody has to volunteer as notetaker; it posts to Slack and sends follow-ups, but the bot can miss the start and recaps need an account.
Positive
Ujjwal Nambiar, Product Hunt reviewer
Fireflies.ai review on Product HuntProduct Hunt review
The reviewer's team invites Fireflies to important meetings for a searchable, speaker-attributed transcript, though dismissing the bot from meetings that do not need it is annoying.
Positive
Scott Monday, CEO and founder of kitchen & bath CRATE, writing for owners of US$2M to US$20M companies
How Fireflies.ai Changed the Way We Run MeetingsNewsletter
Monday's companies record nearly every meeting with Fireflies, declare it up front, fix speaker labels, and feed transcripts back into AI to plan each project's next steps.
Positive
CleverMonkeyKnowHow, r/sysadmin commenter
Comment on: How to fully remove Otter.ai from M365?Reddit comment
Many in the commenter's organization use Fireflies because not everyone has Copilot; the commenter rates Copilot's summaries higher but values going back to a meeting from weeks ago.
Positive
Swagam Dasgupta, Product Hunt reviewer
Fireflies.ai review on Product HuntProduct Hunt review
During discovery interviews with over 100 marketers, Fireflies' assistant broke down pain points faster than the reviewer's team could, and the reviewer stayed after trying Otter.
Positive
cloudking, Hacker News commenter
Comment on: Ask HN: What AI tools is your company using in production?Hacker News comment
Fireflies is the meeting notes tool the commenter's company runs in production, beside ChatGPT Team and GitHub Copilot.
Searchable RecordAll 8 sources on it praise itSearch and AskFred across past meetings, and a record to go back to when details are disputed or forgotten.
Counted for Leaders and teams rolling it out.
Positive
Stakh Vozniak, CEO and co-founder of Cargofy
My CEO stack for running company in 2026X post
Vozniak lists Slack with Fireflies as Cargofy's communication and memory layer in the stack he runs the company on, beside Odoo, Notion, Google Workspace, and n8n.
"@SlackHQ + @firefliesai = communication + memory…"
Excerpt, Stakh Vozniak Positive
Karl Heinz Frankeser, founder and CEO of METAVSHN
Reviewing how our wording changed with customers, through Fireflies and MCPX post
Frankeser searches the Fireflies record to see how the company's wording with customers changed over time and where internal and sales calls disagree, and his agent reads the calls through MCP.
Positive
CleverMonkeyKnowHow, r/sysadmin commenter
Comment on: How to fully remove Otter.ai from M365?Reddit comment
Many in the commenter's organization use Fireflies because not everyone has Copilot; the commenter rates Copilot's summaries higher but values going back to a meeting from weeks ago.
Positive
Swagam Dasgupta, Product Hunt reviewer
Fireflies.ai review on Product HuntProduct Hunt review
During discovery interviews with over 100 marketers, Fireflies' assistant broke down pain points faster than the reviewer's team could, and the reviewer stayed after trying Otter.
Positive
Kapil Amarnani, Business Development Manager, SoftwareSuggest (11-50 employees)
Fireflies.ai review on TrustRadiusTrustRadius review (incentivized)
Amarnani's sales team records every sales meeting, builds agent reports from the transcripts, and estimates 2 to 3 hours saved per agent a week. Hindi is not recognized and the bot sometimes joins late.
Positive
Maria Sergeeva, UX and Content Designer, Career Pathway Institute (51-200 employees)
Fireflies.ai review on TrustRadiusTrustRadius review (incentivized)
Career Pathway Institute uses Fireflies so nobody has to volunteer as notetaker; it posts to Slack and sends follow-ups, but the bot can miss the start and recaps need an account.
Positive
Ujjwal Nambiar, Product Hunt reviewer
Fireflies.ai review on Product HuntProduct Hunt review
The reviewer's team invites Fireflies to important meetings for a searchable, speaker-attributed transcript, though dismissing the bot from meetings that do not need it is annoying.
Positive
Lea L, Product Hunt reviewer
Fireflies.ai review on Product HuntProduct Hunt review
The reviewer's team turns remote meetings into tickets and keeps Fireflies as a log of past meetings to go back to.
Integrations & APIAll 6 sources on it praise itCRM sync, Slack, Notion, Zapier, the API, and AI agents that take meeting data into other systems.
Counted for Leaders and teams rolling it out.
Positive
Karl Heinz Frankeser, founder and CEO of METAVSHN
Reviewing how our wording changed with customers, through Fireflies and MCPX post
Frankeser searches the Fireflies record to see how the company's wording with customers changed over time and where internal and sales calls disagree, and his agent reads the calls through MCP.
Positive
Timo Beckmann, founding engineer at Matix
propose fireflies transcript integrationGitHub pull request on trycompai/crm
Testing Comp AI's open-source CRM for internal use, Beckmann's company found its agent lacked meeting context. Because the team records transcripts and summaries in Fireflies, he proposed an optional integration that feeds them into the CRM.
Positive
Rafaella Fontes, Product Hunt reviewer
Fireflies.ai review on Product HuntProduct Hunt review
The reviewer's team uses Fireflies as low-cost conversation intelligence in place of Gong, feeding recordings to another tool for account analysis.
Positive
sneurgaonkar, Hacker News commenter who built an open-source sales follow-up agent
Comment on: Show HN: Basic AI agent that auto-generates B2B sales follow-upsHacker News comment
The commenter's agent pulls Fireflies call transcripts through the API, with HubSpot and Slack context, to draft follow-ups that a person reviews before sending.
Positive
Harsha Gaddipati, Product Hunt reviewer at Slashy
Fireflies.ai review on Product HuntProduct Hunt review
Slashy chose Fireflies to capture conversations and action items across meeting platforms, and drafts follow-ups from what was actually said.
Positive
Maria Sergeeva, UX and Content Designer, Career Pathway Institute (51-200 employees)
Fireflies.ai review on TrustRadiusTrustRadius review (incentivized)
Career Pathway Institute uses Fireflies so nobody has to volunteer as notetaker; it posts to Slack and sends follow-ups, but the bot can miss the start and recaps need an account.
What concerns them
Every concern practitioners raise, most raised first.
Bot Control & Privacy17 of 22 sources on it raise it as a concernA notetaker that joins meetings uninvited or keeps joining, recaps sent to participants, consent, and meeting data leaving the company or the country.
Counted for Leaders and teams rolling it out.
Raised as a concern, 17
Negative
Morgan State University Division of Information Technology
AI Meeting Note-Taking ToolsUniversity IT guidance page
Morgan State lists Fireflies.ai as not approved and blocks it from university Zoom meetings, because such tools keep meeting content outside the university's managed environment.
Negative
SadMadNewb, Managed service provider, r/msp
AI TranscribingReddit post
An early Fireflies user, the poster's team dropped it for Copilot once it became spammy and virus-like, and now looks for phone capture of in-person meetings.
Negative
California University of Science and Medicine Help Desk
How to stop AI note-taking bots from joining a university Teams meeting without authorization?University IT help page
CUSM moved external participants into a Teams lobby and tells hosts to deny unrecognized accounts such as Fireflies.ai.
Mixed
ramon156, Hacker News commenter who set Fireflies up for their company
Comment on: Cohere Transcribe: Speech RecognitionHacker News comment
Having set Fireflies up for the company, the commenter likes the tool but worries about sending dozens of internal meetings to a US company during an ISO audit.
Negative
Virginia Tech Division of Information Technology and IT Security Office
Use of unauthorized AI meeting assistantsUniversity IT notice, Virginia Tech News
Virginia Tech lists Fireflies.ai among assistants not authorized for university use, will block them on university systems, and points staff to the reviewed assistants built into its licensed meeting platforms.
Negative
Adi Abhyankar, Solutions Developer in Engineering Technical Services at Arizona State University
Technology Bulletin January 2026University IT bulletin, ASU Engineering Technical Services
ASU's engineering IT bulletin names Fireflies.ai among unapproved meeting tools that should not be used. It points faculty and staff to Zoom AI Companion and Microsoft Teams transcription, which ASU provides as approved alternatives.
"Unapproved tools such as Read.AI, Otter.ai, Fireflies.ai, and MeetGeek should not be used."
Excerpt, Adi Abhyankar Negative
phaze08, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Comment on: Blocking AI notetakersReddit comment
After blocking third-party Teams apps and removing Entra access, the admin still had each Fireflies user sign in and delete the account.
Negative
TronFan, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Comment on: Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit comment
The commenter describes Fireflies, Otter, and Read spreading like worms through recap emails, and has no way to stop outside parties bringing them.
Negative
cyberdeck_operator, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit post
After users clicked a Fireflies link in a meeting, the notetaker added itself to their meetings and spread across Teams; blocking the app did not stop it, only deleting the account did.
Negative
Not_Blake, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Comment on: Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit comment
Working the same Fireflies spread in another tenant, the commenter traces it to user consent for OAuth apps and recommends requiring admin consent.
Negative
Chaucer85, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Comment on: Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit comment
Blocking the app in the commenter's tenant did not stop Fireflies bots joining meetings; the account had to be deleted at Fireflies, and data already left the company.
Negative
11CRT, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Comment on: Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit comment
At the commenter's company the Fireflies spread stopped once the subscriber learned the free plan had sent an invite to the CEO.
Negative
doctorevil30564, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Comment on: Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit comment
The commenter's company requires admin consent for apps, and when an employee tried to add Fireflies, IT declined to authorize it and allows only licensed Copilot.
Negative
Sage Freeman, Associate Dean at Chemeketa Community College
Risks with using AI Notetakers for MeetingsCollege faculty technology update, Chemeketa Faculty Hub
Freeman warns that free notetakers such as Fireflies.ai join Zoom meetings without clear approval, take broad calendar access when attendees sign up to read the notes, and email summaries to every participant. The college enabled Zoom's AI Companion instead.
"Taken together, these risks create a situation where personal and institutional data may be shared with a third party without clear control or consent."
Excerpt, Sage Freeman Negative
Case Western Reserve University, Office of Information Security
Learn about upcoming third-party "AI note-taker" application blockUniversity IT notice, The Daily at Case Western Reserve University
From September 12, 2025, Case Western Reserve blocks Fireflies.ai and similar note-takers across Zoom, Teams, and Meet. These tools rejoin future meetings without other attendees' consent and the university has no enterprise contract with the vendors.
Negative
incompletesystem, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Meeting AI for Microsoft Teams that doesn't require you to disable all securityReddit post
Evaluating notetakers for Teams, the poster rejected Fireflies because it needed guest access opened and meeting prompts turned off, which the poster judged too risky.
Negative
UW-Madison DoIT Help Desk
UW-Madison Zoom - Third-party AI Assistant BotsUniversity IT knowledge base article
UW-Madison warns that bots such as Fireflies join meetings uninvited once someone connects their calendar, and gives hosts steps to block them.
Discussed without concern, 5
Positive
Defconx19, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Comment on: Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit comment
The commenter shares Fireflies notes with every attendee by choice, calls it a great service, and notes the paid plans keep data out of model training.
Positive
oxieg3n, r/sysadmin commenter
Comment on: Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit comment
The commenter's team uses Fireflies with several clients without the spread, and attributes it to tenants letting users approve apps for the whole organization.
Mixed
Fallingdamage, IT administrator, r/sysadmin
Comment on: Teams meeting AI note taker virusReddit comment
The commenter's company runs one approved Fireflies account and blames the spread on Teams settings that let users approve third-party apps.
Positive
Ujjwal Nambiar, Product Hunt reviewer
Fireflies.ai review on Product HuntProduct Hunt review
The reviewer's team invites Fireflies to important meetings for a searchable, speaker-attributed transcript, though dismissing the bot from meetings that do not need it is annoying.
Positive
Scott Monday, CEO and founder of kitchen & bath CRATE, writing for owners of US$2M to US$20M companies
How Fireflies.ai Changed the Way We Run MeetingsNewsletter
Monday's companies record nearly every meeting with Fireflies, declare it up front, fix speaker labels, and feed transcripts back into AI to plan each project's next steps.
GILD's fact checks, which don't count as sources
Checked Oct 12, 2026.Auto-join is set to all calendar meetings with a conferencing link by default. Recap emails go to everyone on the invite, internal and external, until a user or admin narrows them. Auto-join and email recap settings
Checked Oct 12, 2026.Data is stored and processed in the United States on AWS and GCP by default. Enterprise Private Storage stores it elsewhere while processing stays in the US. Learn about data storage and transfer
Open them in the record
Where the evidence agrees
Statements this group's sources agree on, then the ones close to agreement.
- Recurring point
The record is most useful once it reaches the tools where work continues: the CRM, Slack, a ticket queue, or an AI agent.
9 supporting sources
Close to agreement: each needs 8 supporting sources
- Below threshold
Value grows when a whole team or company records into one workspace that anyone can search or ask.
6 supporting sources
Where it disagrees
Questions the sources split on, with the count on each side.
For leaders and teams rolling it out, no question reaches 5 sources from 3 authors, with 2 on each side.
The evidence
Whose experience this is
The three groups, then every practitioner by the context they work in, and how emphasis changes with scale.
Three groups drawn from the same sources. Choose a group to select whose experience counts. Within that group, each author counts once in the practitioner sentiment, with their latest view. Signals open on Leaders and teams rolling it out.
Leaders and teams rolling it out
37 sources. These accounts come from teams and from the IT leaders deciding whether Fireflies may join their meetings. They cover shared use, CRM and Slack routing, and who controls the bot.
Individual users
26 sources. Note quality, search, and price come first for people running Fireflies on their own calls.
All users
63 sources. Of these sources, 19 are individuals and 37 speak for a team, a company, or an IT department.
63 sources from practitioners, by the context they work in. Filled rows count for this group.
- Individual userOne person using it for their own work26 sources
Emphasizes Note quality, search across calls, and transcript accuracy
- Small team2 to 10 people sharing it11 sources, counted here
Emphasizes Recaps for the team, CRM sync, and follow-up drafts
- DepartmentA department, or a named company's team5 sources, counted here
Emphasizes Shared search, the API, and Slack summaries for a named company's team
- IT & leadershipIT and business leaders deciding the rollout17 sources, counted here
Emphasizes Stopping the bot from spreading through a tenant, and where the data goes
- Organization-wideCompany-wide rollout4 sources, counted here
Emphasizes Campus-wide blocks at Case Western Reserve and Virginia Tech over auto-join and data leaving the university
What changes with scale. Individual users talk most about note quality. Teams shift to integrations and the shared record. IT administrators write about removing a notetaker that users let into the tenant, and auto-join, recap, and app-consent settings decide whether that happens.
Where the sources come from
Where this group's sources were published.
Counted for Leaders and teams rolling it out, from 37 sources. Change group
58 sources for this group, 21 of them documentation
- Communities & Product Reviews29, 50% of 58 sources
- Product Documentation21, 36% of 58 sources
- Blogs, Company Write-ups & IT Guidance8, 14% of 58 sources
Older evidence is retained when it still applies. Sources that depend on a limit or gap that has since changed stay in the history, marked Needs a recheck.
See sources by originThe record
Who each source is, how it knows, whether it still applies and what it counts toward.
Newest first, on its own page. Every count above opens its sources there.
Read all 84 sourcesAbout this read
What changed, and how we count
What changed
- Oct 30, 2026: a second-model check removed two Operator Insights. The Cruz docket card is gone, since the docket page shows only the filing and the voluntary dismissal; the Illinois suits stay in the review and the governance guide from their complaints and dockets. Scott Monday's card is gone, since his post closes on an offer to help other businesses roll the idea out and names no company; his earlier Signals record stays. DeckRooster's card now calls it a small presentation-design company, and an X user's record now says they asked whether Gmail login was removed.
- Builds the evidence base from public sources only: every source links to the page it comes from and names its author and publication date.
- Shows a finding for a group only when at least 5 sources from 3 different authors discuss it, and a disagreement only with at least 2 sources on each side.
- Merges bot behavior, consent, and data handling into Bot Control & Privacy, since each alone falls short of 5 sources from 3 authors. Drops two statements, Present in the meeting and Check before sharing, which 4 sources each support.
- Removes 22 sources: 18 dated before January 2025, 3 from an SEO review site, a comparison-content site, and an IT consultancy's marketing blog, and 1 emoji comparison listicle on DEV Community. Adds 24 from Reddit, TrustRadius, and Hacker News. Automatic Capture and Price & Plan Limits now fall short of 5 sources from 3 authors for every audience.
- Checks every documentation page against Fireflies' current site, help center, Privacy Policy, and Terms of Service.
- Oct 25, 2026: adds 8 sources, 2 university IT blocks, 3 GitHub issues, 2 X posts, and a newsletter post. Integrations & API now reaches the minimum among leaders and among builders, and Fit & Reliability and Price & Plan Limits reach it across all sources.
- Oct 26, 2026: adds named accounts from Cargofy, Chemeketa Community College, Arizona State, and Matix, and records the roles Scott Monday and Karl Heinz Frankeser state on their own sites.
- Oct 28, 2026: adds 7 X posts and a GitHub pull request from GILD's research ledger, each with the passage it quotes, on agents that join calls through Fireflies, trial renewals and a bot that keeps joining. They come from a research set gathered toward critical accounts, so none enters a score and every view keeps its figure. The Hub adds Case Western Reserve's and Virginia Tech's blocks, the Illinois class actions and five named teams as Operator Insights.
Method
A running review of what people using Fireflies at work report, from individual users to company-wide rollouts. Each finding links to its sources, and each conflict shows both sides.
Counts cover only the sources GILD reviewed.
Who counts
- Leaders and teams rolling it out
- Small team, Department, IT & leadership, Organization-wide
- Individual users
- Individual user
- All users
- Everyone in the leaders and teams and individual users groups
Choose a group to select whose experience counts. Within that group, each author counts once in the practitioner sentiment, with their latest view. GILD files each source in a group from how the account describes its author. A role or employer marked self-described is what the source states about themselves. Documentation checks facts for every group and never counts toward sentiment.
How the numbers work
- Overall signal. Positive votes minus negative ones, per 100 votes from the sources that take a side. Each author counts once, with their latest view, whoever they are and wherever they posted. The older weighted reading, where accounts GILD matched to a named person count three times when GILD lists the author among IT and business leaders and twice otherwise, is shown beside it as a second view. Where an author wrote more than one source, the line beside the split gives the votes, one per author, so the score follows from it. When one author's sources from the same day disagree, that author counts as mixed, and a half point rounds away from zero. Sources with no opinion are listed and not counted. Strong positive is +50 or higher, positive +20 to +49, mixed −19 to +19, negative −20 to −49, strong negative −50 or lower.
- Weighted reading, second view. Counted the older way, where an account GILD matched to a named person counts two or three times, leaders and teams read +14 mixed (method sentiment/S1). GILD printed that number as "GILD score" until October 29, 2026; most of those matches rest on a name or a self-described role.
- Method change, Oct 30, 2026. GILD changed how practitioner sentiment counts, to one vote per author. Weighted, it read +14 Mixed; with one vote per author it reads +6 Mixed. No evidence changed.
- Unscored. A group gets a score only with 20 sources from 15 authors. Below that, one source moves the score about 5 points, so the read says "Unscored until 20 sources from 15 authors" and shows its counts.
- Independence. A source whose author works for the vendor, for one of its partners or programs, or for a competitor, and a page the vendor published or ran, is listed with that tie and counts toward nothing. One author counts on at most two records per product. The line under the score says how many authors and how many separate discussions the counted sources come from: comments in one thread are one discussion.
- Praise and concerns. How many of the sources that discuss a theme praise it or raise it.
- Consensus. A statement joins when 20% of the group's sources support it and fewer contradict it. Contradicting sources are counted separately. Below that line a statement shows as building. At 40% or more it reads Strong agreement; below, Recurring point.
- Disagreements. The count on each side. GILD names no winner and gives no share of all users.
- Minimum evidence. A finding needs 5 sources from 3 authors; a disagreement also needs 2 on each side. Smaller counts stay in the table below, marked under the minimum.
Labels on a source
A source's date and whether it still applies are separate: a recent post can describe an old version, and an old one can still hold.
- Documented
- Stated in official documentation.
- Reported
- A practitioner's account of their own use.
- Measured
- Backed by the source's own measurements, such as a comparative test or tracked team metrics.
- GILD analysis
- GILD's check of a claim against official documentation.
- Current
- Describes the product as it is now.
- Still applicable
- Older, and the behavior or lesson still holds.
- Needs a recheck
- May depend on a plan, version or setting that changed since it was written. It keeps counting until GILD rechecks it, since the rest of the account usually holds, and its card says so.
- Out of date
- No longer accurate. Kept in the record; counts toward nothing current.
Flagged for a recheck, of the sources that take a side: leaders and teams 0 of 36, individual users 0 of 15, all users 0 of 51.
Limits
- GILD reviewed 63 public sources dated January 2025 or later. They do not represent all Fireflies customers. Reddit supplies 18 accounts, 13 of them from r/sysadmin, where IT administrators discuss the notetaker spreading through Microsoft 365 and Teams tenants, so the leaders' accounts lean toward IT. The rest are 9 Product Hunt reviews, 6 Hacker News comments, 6 TrustRadius reviews, 6 university IT pages. They also include 3 GitHub issues and 2 pull requests from developers building on the API, 9 X posts, 3 newsletter posts, and a community college's faculty technology update. GILD excluded nine Product Hunt reviews posted between June 20 and July 8, 2025 with near-identical wording. Reddit threads were read on reddit.com because the Arctic Shift archive was rate-limited. Fireflies' own customer stories are vendor material and are excluded. The 7 X and GitHub posts added on October 28 come from a research set gathered toward critical accounts and count toward no score.
- Fireflies changed its free plan, storage, AI credits, and desktop app during 2025 and 2026. Each account describes the product at publication. Accounts that depend on a limit or a missing feature that has since changed are marked Needs a recheck.
Every count, and the sources behind it
12 findings for 3 groups
Each row opens its sources for the group you are reading.
| Finding | Leaders and teams rolling it out | Individual users | All users | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Current readCurrent sentiment | 18 positive, 2 mixed, 16 negative | 10 positive, 1 mixed, 4 negative | 28 positive, 3 mixed, 20 negative | Sources |
| PraiseAutomatic Capture | 3 of 3 positive (under the minimum) | 1 of 1 positive (under the minimum) | 4 of 4 positive (under the minimum) | Sources |
| PraiseNotes & Action Items | 8 of 8 positive | 5 of 5 positive | 13 of 13 positive | Sources |
| PraiseSearchable Record | 8 of 8 positive | 4 of 4 positive (under the minimum) | 12 of 12 positive | Sources |
| PraiseIntegrations & API | 6 of 6 positive | 2 of 5 positive | 8 of 11 positive | Sources |
| ConcernBot Control & Privacy | 17 of 22 raise it | 1 of 1 raise it (under the minimum) | 18 of 23 raise it | Sources |
| ConcernTranscript Accuracy | 1 of 2 raise it (under the minimum) | 1 of 1 raise it (under the minimum) | 2 of 3 raise it (under the minimum) | Sources |
| ConcernPrice & Plan Limits | 0 of 1 raise it (under the minimum) | 3 of 4 raise it (under the minimum) | 3 of 5 raise it | Sources |
| ConcernFit & Reliability | 2 of 2 raise it (under the minimum) | 3 of 4 raise it (under the minimum) | 5 of 6 raise it | Sources |
| ConsensusNotes leave Fireflies | 9 supporting | 3 supporting (under the minimum) | 12 supporting (below threshold) | Sources |
| ConsensusOne record for the team | 6 supporting (below threshold) | 0 supporting (under the minimum) | 6 supporting (below threshold) | Sources |
| Current readEvidence mix | 58 sources | 47 sources | 84 sources | Sources |
Fact checks
GILD's checks of claims against official documentation, kept apart from the source counts.
- Bot Control & Privacy. Auto-join is set to all calendar meetings with a conferencing link by default. Recap emails go to everyone on the invite, internal and external, until a user or admin narrows them. Auto-join and email recap settings, checked Oct 12, 2026
- Bot Control & Privacy. Data is stored and processed in the United States on AWS and GCP by default. Enterprise Private Storage stores it elsewhere while processing stays in the US. Learn about data storage and transfer, checked Oct 12, 2026
- Transcript Accuracy. The notetaker bot labels speakers. Take Notes on the desktop app, which captures without a bot, shows Speaker 1 and Speaker 2 instead. Bot vs. No Bot: Which capture am I using?, checked Oct 12, 2026
- Price & Plan Limits. Storage is 400 minutes per user on Free and 8,000 on Pro, pooled across the team and never reset. At the cap new meetings are still captured, but older ones must be deleted to open them. Meeting storage limits, checked Oct 12, 2026
- Fit & Reliability. Take Notes saves a transcript and notes but no audio or video file, and an interrupted no-bot session may not be recoverable. Does the desktop app save an audio recording?, checked Oct 12, 2026