Really? Yes, "information is sketchy"; it's "sketchy" to the point of not being any "information" at all. From the "claim":
I don't see what it was in that statement that would leave you to "presume" that anything was represented as being "defamatory toward DreamHost itself". In fact, for those the least bit curious as to what might have been a defamation issue (since the "blogger" can't be bothered to tell you!), turning to the Google cache to take a look at the site (warning NSFW!) is useful. If you do that that, you'd probably realize that any number of issues might possibly (quite likely?) have gotten this "blogger" into legal issues over "defamation". edit- though in this case, that doesn't even appear to be the real issue at all
The rest of his post about his backup problems is just typical ignorant blathering - he obviously knows as little about backup practices as he appears to know about the law and TOS compliance.
The TOS is pretty clear, and "saying negative things about DreamHost" doesn't even generate a raised eyebrow with the DreamHost Abuse staff - it's a daily occurrence, even on these forums.
There is nothing to see here relevant to DreamHost censoring negative commentary; I think this is pretty clearly a case of an "idiot and his blog" run afoul of the law and/or TOS. meh.
The one thing worth noting, as has been noted repeatedly in these forums, (and should be clear from reading the DreamHost TOS), is that users should take responsibility for their own backups. Period. Full stop.
This is true in every case, for everyone, in every circumstance, when storing data on someone else's machine, irrespective of whatever "backup" facilities are available on a host - even if they are "guaranteed" (which in DreamHost's case, they are not!)
Edited: Ha! I walked away for a sandwich and "missed" the responses from GregR - so it was spam, eh? Ha, well ... so much for what this guy claims!