Below are all the negative comments we received between going on line
in 5/95 up to 9/96. We've got more since... including some real beauties.
We'll try to add them when we have the time.
You piece of shit person. I am tired of reading this stupid shit!
What a bunch of blood thirsty trolls. You people bring new
meaning to the words #$%&%# lawyers, shame on you.
- To which we replied:
As I am not an atty I have turned your letter over to our Chief
Counsel, Ralf R. Rinkle, J.D., Esq., who's reply follows:
Dear Mr. ...,
I am writing to thank you for your exceptionally kind comments. As
a real, famous attorney (NOT an imposter!) I am proud to be
connected with the subject of your glowing review and, with your kind
permission, will be including it in my c.v.
Furthermore, I will advise my client to include your remarks in any
future promotional material directed to my fellow attorneys as it is
sure to greatly increase their opinion of the Library.
Your web site appears to be a great service to the public, but it
is a little difficult to take seriously, or depend on the
authenticity of the information, due to the foul language and
insulting remarks therein.
It would nice if one with so little intellect could relate to
conservative Veiws without first telling all how narrow minded one is...
is this place real? Im not even gonna bother looking. I got through
a few pages of ridiculous comments. I suggest you clean up your page.
if someone is desperate enough to search for law info, they dont want
to hear cheesy comments.
Hello... I'm a new visitor to your web site. It's not clear to me
what image of your site you wish to promote. On one hand, a legal
reference facility seems to be a good thing, and I have already
found some interesting material to read.
On the other hand, I was somewhat "put off" by two things that
seem to me to be inappropriate. Why blast a visitor's interest in
art with sarcasm and contempt? And your characterization of the
ACLU as "The nation's leading pinko bleeding heart...," etc.
suggests that the site's focus is something other than rational.
Howdy, I logged into your 'lectric Law Library looking for
something in the Federal Register, but didn't find the Federal
You wrote <>
If you plan to put yourselves out as a "law" center, then you
should try to get facts of cases & deliberations right.
Make jokes about capital murder trials if you like, but if you are
providing facts to the public, try to make those facts comport
I guess I was expecting a little too much of the Law Library motif
- I thought that along with law, you would have valid info - and
you do, in terms of the downloadable brifs filed by both sides.
But for someone who knows little about the trial (or for potential
jurors, some of whom, I'm sure, have 'Net access) it can be very
confusing to see "they confessed to murder" when (a) they aren't
pleading guilty to it, (b) they haven't confessed to murder, and
(c) you're putting yourself out as a "law" site - and you seem
confused about the difference between homicide & murder.
- In response to this message we changed the Menendez
page's "confessions to the murders" to "confessions to the
killings" and "all the female jurors took pity" to "most of the
female jurors (and a few males) took pity".
I don't know if this is what you intended for the Virtual Law
Library, but I thought that it would have more text directly
connected (or available by hypertext). For example, you might
have the federal and state laws and regulations in the Library,
directly or by link. Several commercial services (LEXIS, Westlaw)
have found a huge need for these and other legal materials.
Subject: humor. You probably haven't considered that disabled
people use the Web, too, and your use of the word "imbecile" on
your art/humor page is not really funny. You could just have
easily used the word "dork" or "dweeb" or something without the
developmentally disabled connotation. Maybe be a little more
sensitive without losing your sense of humor. It can be done.
Thanks for reading this far.