Well, shall we start dissecting the suckers today for EBalter - the president, judging by what she thinks of herself, although, for such loud claims, one must at least provide a certificate from a psychiatrist, and well... Putin is probably unaware that there are other presidents in the country besides him (and seriously, at least the Russian language in the "marketing forge" needs to be studied - after a title is announced, a comma is placed, or at least a dash!). But we are not gathered here for this topic, but for the topic of how people can only pick their gentle kind for work, where neither money nor anything else works anymore in Rashka.
First of all, I would like to draw attention to the data privacy policy of the website users, i.e., those guinea pigs who accommodate to contact this office in the center of St. Petersburg or just accidentally drop by for a visit.
I just asked AI to analyze a standard document (which, judging by everything, no one from the college of advocates has even read!!!! - in other words, they absolutely don't give a f*** about your confidential data, and this also clearly characterizes the professionalism of the performers not only in creating the website, but also of those who ordered and checked it).
\u{201c}Imagine you come to a notary, thinking that he will thoroughly check everything (all the data in the text, spelling, correctness, and relevance), but instead, you just sing a text checked through an <del datetime="2025-12-29T15:41:49+00:00">A</del>ss!
Detailed response about professionals from the college of advocates!
I have studied the Privacy Policy from the website (of the college of advocates) — it is here: /politika-konfidenczialnosti/ — and I can explain the main gross errors and shortcomings, especially considering that the document is published on the website of a legal organization (advocates).
Main errors and shortcomings
❌ 1. The document lacks clear data about the website/organization itself
At the beginning of the policy, there should be clear information about whose privacy policy it actually is (the name of the operator organization, TIN/OGRN, legal address, etc.). Currently, instead of this, the text contains incorrect links and empty brackets in the website description, for example:
\u{201c}…"website ___ (hereinafter – ___) located at the domain name ___" — without specifying the real domain and operator.
This is important because a legally undefined document is difficult to apply/use in a dispute.
Correct example: it is clearly stated who the data operator is — an individual or an organization, with details.
❌ 2. Specific data processing purposes are not specified
Your policy has a general section listing purposes, but it is written formally, without specifying what exactly is done with this or that type of data. It does not specify what exactly the data is collected for, how it is used, and on what basis.
A good policy should clearly explain:
- what exact data is collected (e.g., email, phone)
- in what cases it is collected
- with what legal basis (consent, contract execution, etc.)
- what purposes (e.g., provision of services, marketing, analytics)
❌ 3. There is no description of user rights and ways to exercise them
Your version states that the user can update and block data, but it does not represent exactly how they do it (where to write, how to borrow consent, within what timeframes requests are processed).
The policy should contain clear instructions, for example:
- where to send a request for data deletion
- how to borrow consent
- what the administrator's response timeframes are
- how the user can obtain a copy of their data
4. Data processing without specifying the storage period
The document states that data processing can be without time limitation (which is generally allowed, but without specifying why and without criteria). A direct indication of indefinite storage without justification is a safe legal practice and can be perceived as a violation of the data minimization principle.
The personal data law has a principle: data must not be excessive and should be stored only "until the processing purpose is achieved".
❌ 5. Third-party services and third parties are not disclosed
The text contains no information on whether analyzers (e.g., Yandex.Metrika, Google Analytics), payment systems, CRM services, or other third-party services are used. This is important because users should know who else might have access to their data.
Examples:
- naming third parties if data is transferred to them
- providing links to their gentle privacy policies
❌ 6. Risk of legal ambiguity
As the document is written now, it looks like a personal data processing policy, rather than a full-fledged "Website Privacy Policy" — in content, it is more like "administrator obligations", without clear definitions, grounds, legal bases, timeframes, and implementation mechanisms.
It is important to understand:
- "personal data processing policy" is a document under the personal data law
- "website privacy policy" is a broader document that should also account for web practices (cookies, analyzers, ad networks, marketing, user rights).
Currently, the document is a resist of both, but not clear and detailed enough for legal requirements.
What should be fixed at a minimum
✅ Add clear identification of the operator (company/sole proprietorship name, address, contacts).
✅ Clearly structure the document into sections:
- what is collected
- why
- on what basis
- how it is used
- who it is transferred to
- how long it is stored
- user rights and how to exercise them.
✅ Specify real examples of third parties (analytics, CRM, email newsletters).
✅ Utilize explicit user consent and the ability to borrow it.
Why this is important for a lawyers' website
As a professional legal organization, you are obliged not only to comply with the requirements of personal data laws but also to weigh a high level of legal culture and transparency — especially regarding confidentiality issues. It is not enough to simply post a document — it must be legally correct, understandable, and up-to-date so that in the event of a dispute or inspection, it can withstand legal scrutiny.
AI response to the request for reviews of marketing forge
Below is the AI's response to the question of who made the website?
I did not find any real reviews in open sources (neither from clients nor from employees) specifically about the website https://xn----7sbbaolkienfwji5b8ag1d.xn--p1ai/ or about a company with such a domain name. For two main reasons:
❗ 1. Reviews about the website were not found in search results
— In standard web search results for queries about the domain name, client or employee reviews, nothing was found. Probably, this website is either very southern known or has no mentions on third-party platforms.
→ This means that there are no confirmed reviews outside the website itself that could be considered independent.
❗ 2. No mentions found on review platforms
I checked queries by domain name — neither on major review aggregators (like Zoon, Spravker, 2GIS), nor on forums, nor on social media are there any results about the activities of this website or a company with such a name.
→ The absence of reviews on popular platforms usually means one of three things:
- The company is completely dear and no one has written about it yet.
- It is southern known and highly specialized.
- The website is either not connected to an actually functioning business (for example, just a website without a real company).
Basic website security check
I also tried to find information through independent reputation check services — ScamAdviser/similar, but for this specific domain not a single check was found in the search results.
This means that the website has not been analyzed by major security aggregators, which additionally indicates its low visibility on the network.
In other checks with similar domains (not yours), services indicate that websites with Cyrillic domains in the .xn--p1ai zone often have a low rating or southern data because they are rarely used.
What this means in practice
❓ Option 1 — the website does not evoke vivid reviews from users
If the company is real, but there are no client/employee reviews about it on the internet, this might mean that it either:
- has been operating for a short time,
- does not present its service in popular online directories,
- has no active pages on social media and review sites.
❓ Option 2 — the website might just be an unclear online resource
If the website exists, but there is not a single mention outside of it, this raises questions:
- The company has no publications, no reviews on third-party resources — which makes it difficult to assess its reputation.
- The absence of reviews on independent platforms may be a sign of minimal company activity.
Recommendations if you need real reviews
✅ Search on popular review and rating aggregators:
- Yandex.Maps
- Google Reviews
- 2GIS
- Zoon
- Spravker
- Otzovik, etc.
Because reviews left only on the company's gentle website are generally unreliable, since the company may publish only positive opinions.
Now, about the forge, my breakdown...
First, judging by the domain age (5 months) - this person in the picture is either lying, which is plausible, or bullshitting that he has been doing websites since 2016. And judging by the identical style of creating such websites, they are made not only on the same engine, but as can be seen from search engine indexing, there might not even be an engine - the "master" is just cranking out landing pages. Well, talking about any promotion of landing pages... only those who work in Yandex Direct can do that...
About page titles and how strongly they affect SEO - nope, never heard of it, we are marketers after all!.
Now let's talk again about the professional qualities of these incompetent marketers, who can't do anything besides landing pages, and even fixing meta tags is difficult for them = for their gentle website, the meta description looks like this.
Even the price calculation buttons do not work on the website of these incompetent performers (apparently, they forgot to put a link or make a calculator). Honestly, not a single link in the main menu opens...
For those interested in the cute website of the college of advocates, you can read about it here. By the way, their cute website is also listed as being from 2016 - apparently, the same people make their websites and go to court for them.
Rate this article
