Some years ago, I used a site called BitBacker. Basically Patreon with Bitcoin. It was a one-man operation, and it outgrew his ability to maintain. Another Libertarian/free speech platform called "Flote" (Boost VC funded) took it over and rolled all the users into its own platform. Some time afterwards, after a fresh round of funding, they started adding new policies that amounted to "we love free speech BUT...". It didn't take much time beyond that for the whole thing to collapse in on itself. I bailed as soon as the new policies were announced.

Similar patterns occurred with Minds.com (VC funding rounds followed by new terms of service, "think of the children" excuses, etc) and Gab-dot-com (free speech absolutists until they picked up a majority boomer-con religious audience, then heel turned into "anonymity/decentralization is for criminals and pedophiles"...almost literal quote from the owner/founder there).

Each time the only option for disaffected users was to pull up roots and start over from zero at the new place. I know people who ment from Gab, to Minds, to Flote, getting socio-politically rugged each time.

Many, like myself, ended up on the Fediverse. I run my own server that interoperates with a dozen others over the shared protocol. Some Fedi servers went full retard, but data portability features meant it was easy to migrate to a new home without losing your entire follow list.. in some cases it was actually seamless and I barely noticed the change.

I've come to feel that a site/service is only trustworthy if its creators build around the assumption that they'll eventually go under or be compromised. If there isn't a plan or an infrastructure to handle the survival of users/content beyond that point, it's not forward thinking enough. This is just a personal opinion, though, based on my own experience and observation, and I accept that some feel it's unreasonable and overly paranoid.