Nightwatch & ESN Hosting

Our Position on Nightwatch and ESN Hosting: Why We Cut Ties

-# Official statement from our team | Please read in full before sharing or replying

Summary

We have ended our affiliation with Nightwatch and ESN Hosting. This is an ongoing issue, and this post explains our reasoning, what we observed, and what we recommend to our community. Everything below is our own opinion and experience.

Background

Our community relied on third-party services to stay safe, stay online, and stay organized. When a service we depend on stops being reliable, stops being honest, or puts our members at risk, we have a duty to say so.

False Accusations Against Shark

Representatives connected to Nightwatch publicly described Shark as a raiding tool. This is false. Shark is a moderation and server-management project built to protect communities, not attack them.

Calling a project a "raider" without proof is serious. It damages reputations, causes users to be banned or distrusted, and spreads misinformation across multiple servers. We asked for evidence and none was provided.

Unauthorized Global Bans

We reviewed a Nightwatch global ban request log. It shows:

• A global ban request that was approved and executed across 42 guilds, with failures in 7 more
• A stated reason of "threatening a user, and breaking tos"
• The proof field reading "No visual proof attached"

A ban that reaches dozens of servers on a vague reason and no attached proof is a problem. The affected user was never given a chance to respond, and the servers involved were not given evidence to review.

Banning users across many guilds without clear permission or proof behaves like the very tooling it claims to defend against. We believe a global moderation service must meet a much higher standard of transparency and accountability.

ESN Hosting

We also no longer recommend ESN Hosting. Our concerns:

• Reselling: the provider appears to resell infrastructure rather than operate its own, with little transparency about who actually runs the servers
• Reliability: we have no confidence in consistent uptime or stability
• Trustworthiness: a lack of clear evidence of proper security practices
• Professionalism: the website appears poorly built and possibly AI-generated

A host has access to your files, databases, and credentials. Without clear security practices, that is not a risk worth taking.

Concerns About Website Quality and AI Use

Both services present polished branding and websites, but when we looked closer we saw signs of low-effort, AI-generated work, including logos and site content. AI is a useful tool, but unreviewed AI-written code and design raise real questions:

• Has the code been audited for vulnerabilities?
• Who is accountable if something breaks?
• What happens to your data in the event of a breach?

Until those questions are answered with evidence, we cannot vouch for either service.

Why This Matters

Services you connect to your community can access your data, your members' data, and your credentials. Trusting the wrong provider can mean banned users with no recourse, leaked data, and downtime when you need stability most.

What We Recommend

• Research any provider or bot before adding it to your server
• Verify their security practices and who actually owns the infrastructure
• Demand proof before accepting moderation actions or accusations
• Review all permissions and integrations connected to either service
• Report suspicious activity to our staff

Final Word

We do not take cutting ties lightly. This decision comes from repeated concerns, not a single incident. This is an ongoing issue, and we will update this post as new information is confirmed. If you have questions or evidence of your own, contact our staff.

-# This post reflects our opinions and experiences. It is intended to inform our community, not to harass anyone. Do your own research.