[5] Based out of Culver City, California, they started sending letters to thousands of police and sheriff's departments in the United States in September 2007 to gather information for their database.

[7] Their friend Crys Spelman ran public relations;[2] she stated that they created the website to "open up dialogue" between opponents and supporters of law enforcement agencies.

[10] Before the website's official launch on February 28, 2008, a bill was proposed in the Utah State Senate with the goal of allowing police to withhold misconduct reports from the public.

[13] Brayshaw subsequently sued the city of Tallahassee and the state attorney in September 2009 with the assistance of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida to have the statute declared unconstitutional, and to be paid damages for his arrest.

[13] Federal judge Richard Smoak ruled in favor of Brayshaw, and on April 30, 2010, struck down the statute that made it a crime to publish police officers' addresses and phone numbers to intimidate, hinder or interfere with their duties, because he deemed it to be in violation of the right to free speech.

Ruben Vasquez, president of the Saginaw police officers union, commented on the lack of verification associated with anonymous reports on the website, and said that they have "more serious things to be concerned with", like the safety of the city and its citizens.

[2] Similarly, Mike Tellef, speaking on behalf of the Peoria police department, explained that they would use the website as a tool and that they welcome the feedback: "We have an obligation to ensure that the services that we're providing to the public are the utmost and the best that we can give them for their taxpayer dollar".

[25] Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office spokesperson Larry McKinnon said that the department did not take the website seriously, and that they did not use it for internal affairs issues, as they were already giving out forms for people in the community to provide feedback.

[29] Jacqui Cheng of Ars Technica also commented on the website's potential for abuse, but that it could be likely to skew the other way too; she noted that among the top rated officers, one user had left five-star reviews across the entire country.

[30] Her first comments on potential abuse were mirrored by University of Southern California law professor Thomas D. Griffith, remarking that "unconfirmed reports that can be over-praising or condemning is not the best way to ensure accountability".

[31] It has been cited by Ed Downey, associate professor at The College at Brockport, as an example of a larger trend enabled by Web 2.0 technologies to assess the quality of civil servants.

[32] Similarly, the website has also been given as an example of "social reporting" that allows the people within a given community to gather information and comments for collective assessment of the quality of public officials.

[35] The website helped inspire the Landman Report Card, a tool for landowners to grade landmen (i.e. oil and gas industry representatives) that they have negotiated mineral rights with.