That’s more action than Twitter has taken against the Taliban accounts active on Twitter. They even issued a statement [0] about it, months after banning the President of the United States:

> Twitter gave the Taliban a green light to keep tweeting while noting the social media site would “continue to proactively enforce” its rules on the “glorification of violence, platform manipulation and spam.”

[0] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-twitter-allows-taliban-ma...

I wonder what their suspension criteria is. Maybe it's just "too much bad press"?

DDoS-Guard are in the strange position of being seen as a legitimate service within Russia, used by banks and telecoms and newspapers, but are almost exclusively used for illegal or unsavory purposes outside of Russia. They are well aware of what their global clientele are up to, but I assume they would rather avoid their domestic clients becoming too aware of it.

I don't have a strong opinion about them but i'd be surprised if they were really independent of the Russian state. Too much commercial autonomy can be a liability in some places; it goes to your head and next thing you know you're falling out of a window.

Of course that’s always one criteria. But at it’s core it just comes down to certain customer relationships being deeply unprofitable and not worth continuing.

Nah, too much Nazi is their line I believe. Pro Nazi speech is heavily banned in Russia and it is a Russian company.

Strangely enough Russia is quite a transphobic country itself where people like Keffals are thrown into prison so I'm surprised they would take action against something they blame the West for

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/12/23/putin-gender...