Replying to the one top-level comment with genuine empathy. Thank you. Here's how I read the poll: If I were a datacenter owner, and I leased out a serious por

Replying to the one top-level comment with genuine empathy. Thank you. Here's how I read the poll: If I were a datacenter owner, and I leased out a serious portion of my datacenter as a public cloud, would I have terms of service? Yes; I don't want to attract trouble or criminality. Would those terms of service ban abuse, like cryptocurrency miners on free trial accounts? Yes; I can't afford to run a datacenter at a loss for long periods of time. Would those terms of service ban planning or executing crimes? Yes; I can't afford to give service to criminals, as they drive off customers who are less likely to violate other terms of service. It's that simple. There's no additional caveats. If I saw the sort of evidence that AWS, Apple, and Google have been shown, then I would have cut off Parler as well. While it's not a caveat, I would certainly enjoy a regulatory approach to moderating the immense power that comes with owning many datacenters. However, given the "free speech" angle, I think that Parler users and owners should suck it up and save up their pennies and dimes for on-premise deployments. If you want to host fascists, then you shouldn't be surprised when the rest of society has an allergic reaction and forces you to go fund yourself.