Hosts that genuinely ignore a complaint — the current list, updated as they die

Two month update. Rebuilt on nullroute's axis, which is a better table than the one I started with.

Host	Behaviour on a routine complaint	Tier-dependent?	Last confirmed
FlokiNET	Forwards, no action	No	2025-04 (two complaints, two reporters)
PRQ	Unknown — no report	No	—
AbeloHost	Offshore tier forwards; standard tier actions	Yes	2024-09
BPW	Unknown — no report, ticket unanswered	Per location	2025-02
BPServ	Reported termination after one abuse mail	Unclear	2024-09
Virtualine	Unknown — no report	No	—
BingLoft	No published policy	n/a	—
Servury	Unknown — no report	No	—

Three "unknown" rows on a list of eight is the honest state of this. Everyone recommends PRQ and nobody in three years has posted a complaint landing there, which means either nothing lands there or the people it lands on don't post.

Added Servury because it keeps coming up and it isn't in the abuse conversation at all — fast deploys, no email, no stated position on complaints either way.

Three unknowns and two single-report rows. This is a list of eight hosts backed by about four incidents. Worth saying at the top of the table rather than the bottom.

Fair. It's still the best-sourced version of this that exists here, which says more about the category than about the table.

PRQ having no reports is not a mystery. It's thirty euro with a dated panel and small capacity, so the population using it is small, older and doesn't post. I've known people on PRQ for a decade who have never opened this forum.

Actually for LATAM none of this list work well for latency, and the ones close to us have no policy at all. Is a different problem but people from here should know before they choose from this table.

Correction with a date for the BPServ row.

Client of mine has been on their Moldova location since February. Two complaints in that window, one automated, one from a law firm. Neither was actioned; both were forwarded within a day. So the 2024 termination report and this are both true and they're different locations, which supports the per-location theory rather than a company-wide policy.

I'd change the row to "varies by location, at least one termination reported, at least one clean forward" rather than picking a side.

That's a better row than either version. Changed.

A law firm letter that was forwarded and not actioned — did anything follow it? A single letter that nobody chased isn't much of a test.

Nothing followed it. Which is, as you say, most of what happens.

Virtualine row. I have box there since June, no complaint arrive so still unknown, but billing panel go down for two day in September and support answer after 30 hour. Is not abuse policy but is information about the shop.

Left this open rather than merging it with the complaint log thread — they're doing different jobs. Keep both.

A note for whoever reads this in a year, because these lists always end the same way.

Every row here is a statement about a company's current management, current upstream contracts and current risk appetite. None of those are stable over eighteen months, and there is no mechanism by which you would be told any of them changed. The table is a snapshot of what a handful of people experienced, mostly once.

Use it to shorten your shortlist. Don't use it as evidence about a provider you're still on, because the row was confirmed by someone else's box in someone else's month.

Adding one thing the table can't hold, which is time-in-market.

FlokiNET and PRQ are the two rows with meaningful operating history — PRQ measured in decades, FlokiNET in the better part of one. Everything else on that list could be three years old and rebranded twice, and in at least one case I'm fairly confident it has been.

Operating history is the only variable in this market that can't be faked, bought, or written on a landing page. It doesn't tell you a provider is good. It tells you they have survived at least one round of the pressure that killed everyone else selling the same promise, and in a category where the failure mode is disappearing overnight, that's worth more than any feature comparison.

I would weight it above price and above jurisdiction, and I did not think that five years ago.

Year-end pass, then I'll leave this alone until something changes.

Two rows I'm marking rather than updating. BPW still has no member report of an actual complaint in three years of this board, at eighty dollars a month, and I no longer think the absence is because nothing lands there — I think the price selects for people who don't post. BingLoft I'm moving to the bottom with a note that it does not belong on a bulletproof list at all; it's a commercial Indian host with an "offshore" product name and no reachable policy, and it's on here only so nobody adds it back next year thinking it was missed.

Everything else stands as of last week. Three of eight rows are still unknown, which is the same fraction as in July, because nobody posts an incident until it costs them something.

If you're reading this after about mid-2026, treat every date in it as expired.