[itsoktocry]

>Given that the internet is a worldwide phenomenon, it seems incredibly unlikely that all server companies and internet service providers would refuse their business.

I can agree that getting up and running is, probably, always possible. But that is no consolation if you're a business that can arbitrarily be shut down on a whim, perhaps without even being given a warning. The financial circumstances might make restarting or moving around untenable.

>In particular, the 'bulletproof hosting' market is still going strong.

Yes, and if there's anything good to say about this mess, it's that this particular kind of service is likely to grow.

[eejit_compiler]

Yes but considering the business Parler are in, i.e. publishing the sort of controversial content that gets its users banned on more mainstream social media sites, they would have been wise to have a disaster recovery plan for hosting that covered this possibility.

[itsoktocry]

>they would have been wise to have a disaster recovery plan for hosting that covered this possibility.

I agree, and don't feel upset about their particular circumstances.

However, as others have noted, Twitter (moving to AWS) has vastly more controversial content. What are the guidelines as far as what content is tolerable and/or needs to been moderated, and at what rate of "urgency", for them versus Parler? These things aren't spelled out. How can a small business comply?

[eejit_compiler]

I think the general guideline is, don't provide your hosting provider with incentives to enforce their terms of service against you, to the point where you're denied any further business from them.