Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
AZcachemeister

Someone logged the wrong disc!

Recommended Posts

I have noticed several occasions where someone has clearly logged the wrong disc (this is why a picture IS important!).

I so state in my log, but should I contact the incorrect logger?

Does anyone really care that they logged the wrong disc?

Share this post


Link to post

To me it depends on who did the logging. Many of the loggers are geocachers who either stumble over a disk or are directed to one during a cache hunt. Because they are 1) playing a numbers game or 2) just don't know, so they log what they find. "Disk" equals "Found". I have seen benchmarks, especially intersection stations, logged as found even though they were destroyed, with a comment of "it used to be here so I will claim the find". And of course the ubiquitous RMs logged as tri-stations.

 

So how do I react? I admit that I DO care that they logged the wrong disk, so what should I do. In reality, I usually do nothing, because most of the time it is obvious that they are cachers grabbing an occasional benchmark of some sort. Calling them out by posting a note on the recovery page would do no good because they will never come back to that page, as well as looking pretty snooty on my part--"Hey everyone, this guy is a dope and can't even tell what he was looking for". There is no reason for that. Similarly, I won't email them, because there is no need to make them retract their small victory.

 

If, however, I know the person is a serious benchmarker, or wants to be, I will email them and tell them privately. I explain what they have found and what they should be looking for. Everyone has responded positively and has also returned to the area to check more closely.

 

In either case, if I have looked for the disk, I will post my findings, even if they disagree with previous hunters. I will try to explain my conclusions so that if they return to the page they will see my reasoning. They can choose to agree with it or ignore it.

 

So to answer your final question. I do care, but there isn't much I can do. If I sense they will be receptive to a little "benchmarking intervention" I do so privately. Others here will care more or less depending on their temperment.

 

Edit: Just to add a very recent example - LZ0981 in Williamsport, PA. The first person said he found it, but he only found the inscription BM 48. The mark is a chiseled square and from the description is on the foundation. So he didn't find the mark. I looked at his history and it seems he no longer benchmarks, at least not seriously. The second person said he didn't see it at all, but will be back. So I posted my find on the page. I suspect the second poster may return and dig the foundation off, and hopefully find the mark.

Edited by mloser

Share this post


Link to post

I feel pretty much the same as mloser on this. I've seen MANY logs where they got the wrong disc, they got a reference mark instead of the main station, or they log a reset as a found. There are lots of them.

 

On the ones that have actually been destroyed and people keep logging as a FOUND, I will sometimes make a note stating that the mark has been destroyed and all further entries should be a NOT FOUND or DESTROYED. But then a while later someone will log it again as a FOUND.

 

There's not much you really can do.

 

For a lot of people, DISC = FOUND

Share this post


Link to post

I follow mloser's policy of only contacting the person if they look serious about benchmarking.

 

One class of mix-ups I've noticed is SCALED disks; people keep looking in the same wrong place, not following the description. Eventually they get really fed up, and if there's some other random disk there, they photo that, and if not, they post a FOUND log "Well, I spent enough bloody time on this, it's there somewhere."

 

If they're not serious, or if a lot of people have mistakenly logged the station, I almost always post a Note, something like:

 

The disk pictured below is a Whatchamacallit County Survey disk, stamped "blah", while the disk that you need to find for this station is a US Coast & Geodetic Survey disk stamped "whatever". Note that the horizontal coordinates on this station are SCALED, which means they usually are close but could be up to a quarter mile off. Read the description at the bottom of the page carefully, and follow that to FOUND or NOT FOUND the station.

Edited by BuckBrooke

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with the others on this. When I'm tempted to try to interact with someone who did an incorrect log to give them some information that I think will be useful for them to consider, I look at their find stats to see if they are really trying to be a benchmark hunter or not. If it looks like they are not, I just forget it. However, I think that anyone who logs incorrectly also on the NGS side should be contacted on it whether or not they seem to be a regular benchmark hunter.

 

There are 2 views of this whole problem - the people who have logged something incorrectly, and the disks that frequently get logged incorrectly. There are some disks that many people end up seeing, either because they are on a mountaintop or famous place or near a geocache or a trail to one. Some of them are either just the reference mark and some are a disk that isn't in the database at all. I have posted a note on a couple of them here and here with mixed results. But hey, some people do 'get it' and it's like a place to put up a little virtual information stand. ;)

 

On the geocaching side of things is this similar topic. It currently has 883 replies and over 36,000 views and is quite amusing actually (names are hidden, like "cacher XXXX"). The benchmark versions of such stories would not be so aumusing - they are just the result of a misapprehension of what constitutes a find.

Share this post


Link to post

Black Dog Trackers' friendly coaching approach led a compatriot of mine to correct his 'find' of one of the mountain peaks mentioned, together with an on-line note explaining his correction & a photo of the erroneous disk (& how it didn't match the description of the 'find'). That 'coached' cacher went on a week later to recover this station on Alaska's North Slope - and he's hooked now on looking for 'interesting' benchmarks. Discerning private intervention is helpful - thanks in part to Black Dog Trackers there's a new 'northernmost extreme recovery' on the recordbooks for geocachers.

Share this post


Link to post

My theory is to post on the page why I think previous logs were in error. Casual benchmark hunters don't really care, and would not change the log anyway. KV0152. There are some very nice photos of KV0153 posted here. But KV0153 is P 12 Reset, not P 12. Likewise, there are seventeen incorrect logs for KU3601. Oh, well. The station is a triangulation disk, not a bronze plaque.

Share this post


Link to post

One of the popular mistaken finds in North Carolina is FZ0904 in Blowing Rock. The actual station is at an unexciting spot along US-321. What people are finding is the AZ Mark.

 

Some confusion is inevitable. There were, at one time, multiple disks with the same stamping scattered around this scenic attraction. Plus, the lettering has worn off of one disk, making it impossible to know what you found.

 

I follow the pattern expressed by others. I don't post (or e-mail) corrections unless the individual is a regular benchmark hunter. The most common places for recovery errors are at tourist destinations, or near a geocache. Posting corrections or advice has little impact because the report comes after the disk was discovered (by accident). The directions and notes are not consulted in advance of a search.

 

-Paul-

 

From the archives of the NC Geodetic Survey:

 

"THERE IS A CGS BM DISK WITH THE SAME NAME AND YEAR ON TOP OF THE "BLOWING ROCK". THE NGS DATA IS CONFUSED......IN 1971, NONE OF THE MARKS COULD BE FOUND, BUT IN 1993, JULIE WILLIS OF RALEIGH FOUND AND SENT IN A PICTURE OF A REFERENCE MARK DISK STAMPED --BLOWING ROCK NO. 32 1933. SHE SAID IT WAS NEAR A PLATFORM OVERLOOK, ALONG A LEDGE INSIDE THE BLOWING ROCK PARK AND REACHED BY GOING UNDER A RAIL, AND THENCE ALONG A FOOT PATH. FURTHER NOTE--A BENCH MARK ALSO STAMPED --BLOWING ROCK 1933 3655.872--EXISTS INSIDE THE PARK ON THE "BLOWING ROCK" LEDGE."

Share this post


Link to post

Thank you all for the insightful responses.

 

So far it seems all the erroneous logs I have noticed are due to cachers out walking around, seeing a disk, marking the co-ordinates, and logging a find on the nearest mark in the database without checking the stamping on the disk or reading the description.

 

I guess I will continue to do what I've been doing, and log my finds with an included photo, and move on.

Share this post


Link to post

AZcachemeister -

 

You might consider expanding just a bit with these 2 things:

 

1. For location-scaled marks, take the reading with your GPS and put it in your log. I see the numbers in the picture, but it's really best to use the averaging function on your GPS receiver (if it has one) and record the coordinates in your log. Contributing that way makes benchmark hunting more fun, I find. If you decide to submit finds to the NGS (I don't know if you already do or not), they accept the coordinates for scaled marks in recovery reports.

 

2. In addition to the closeup shot, take a 'distant' shot of the mark from several feet away. This not only significantly adds to the value of a recovery report but also gives you a chance to have fun getting a nice picture of the scenery that we can all enjoy. Just be sure that the photo has the disk visible in it. :blink:

Check out the Benchmark Gallery. :blink:

(Hmmm, I need to post some benchmark scenery pictures to the Benchmark Picture contest topic, I've got a bunch ready.)

Share this post


Link to post

What is really sad is when they are reported to the NGS as 'Found' by a GEOCACHER when they are actually destroyed.

 

NGS RD3152

 

GC.com RD3152

 

My GC.com Log

 

I sent an email to Deb Brown in June 2004 that this should be changed to destroyed but I probably should have also put a 'Not Found' log into the NGS.

Edited by YeOleImposter

Share this post


Link to post

What is really sad is when they are reported to the NGS as 'Found' by a GEOCACHER when they are actually destroyed...

This is the real crux of the matter. If it's just a log on GC, so what? Those of us who know better (not everything, just "better" :D ) can post a note or whatever is appropriate, on the site. After all, many of us have seen the NGS or County Surveyors "find" a mark that isn't what they thought it was, so we can't whine about cachers doing it. That *is* why photos are so important; they can really help to clear up any confusion, or faulty memory. They've saved me from at least a couple of bad Recoveries :D If a log has been made on GC, it isn't going to make a difference in The Real World; it doesn't even count in The Numbers Game. But if a Recovery has been made that is clearly in error, then it should be corrected, after very careful and thorough measurements and photo records have been made.

 

Let it be noted that the NGS, in every communication from them that I have seen, is very happy to have a nice body of volunteers, such as we are, out there helping them. They know that errors happen; they don't seem too worried about it, as the number of errors is quite small compared to the bulk of accurate Recoveries that they have gotten from us and other groups. We have (I think) a better track record than the US Power Squadron, which gets a fair amount of ribbing, and the fact is that the vast bulk of their Recoveries are fine, too. They're happy with the USPS and they're happy with us; the occasional goof isn't too big of a deal, I guess :(

Share this post


Link to post

What is really sad is when they are reported to the NGS as 'Found' by a GEOCACHER when they are actually destroyed.

 

NGS RD3152

 

GC.com RD3152

 

My GC.com Log

 

I sent an email to Deb Brown in June 2004 that this should be changed to destroyed but I probably should have also put a 'Not Found' log into the NGS.

 

From the 1937 recovery by the CGS "STATION IS AT FENCE INTERSECTION AND IS MARKED BY BRASS SCREW SET IN CENTER OF TOP OF CUT STONE POST ESTABLISHED BY U.S. GENERAL LAND OFFICE AND KNOWN AS WILLAMETTE STONE."

 

Then in the 1952 "GOOD" recovery "IN THE PAST THE MARK WAS BROKEN OFF AT THE TOP BY VANDALS, BUT ALL THE PIECES WERE RECOVERED AND HAVE BEEN CEMENTED IN PLACE."

 

It appears as though the hole that held the brass screw now holds an aluminum disk. and the original cut stone post has been surrounded with concrete and a plaque.

 

3294_100.jpg

 

3294_200.jpg

 

6db715e8-4cbb-4f9a-b0d3-b16053217398.jpg

 

Is it really destroyed?

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

If the NGS datasheet said something like this:

 

7/12/1988 by NGS (GOOD)

THE WILLAMETTE STONE MARKER HAS BEEN REPLACED BY A DISK MARKED WITH THE WORDS INITIAL POINT.

 

then the finding of this disk would be a find of RD3152.

 

RD3152 is destroyed, since the 8 inch square, 16 inch tall stone post with a beveled top is gone from the adjusted location with no mention in the datasheet of the stone post being replaced with a disk.

 

A disk, which may not be a real monumented point at all, is there where the stone should be.

Edited by Black Dog Trackers

Share this post


Link to post

Look close at the disk and you'll see it is set in a "Cut stone" that may or may not be 18" high. With the concrete surrounding both the plaque and stone marker it is hard to say how tall it is.

 

The marker type is "Stone Monument" and without being there in person the 'disk' is set in stone and not in concrete. How big the cut stone is, is hard to tell from the pictures. If they removed the 'Brass Screw' and replaced it with a 'disk' does it become a reset if the disk is put into the repaired 'stone monument'?

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

Look close at the disk and you'll see it is set in a "Cut stone" that may or may not be 18" high. With the concrete surrounding both the plaque and stone marker it is hard to say how tall it is.

 

The marker type is "Stone Monument" and without being there in person the 'disk' is set in stone and not in concrete. How big the cut stone is, is hard to tell from the pictures. If they removed the 'Brass Screw' and replaced it with a 'disk' does it become a reset if the disk is put into the repaired 'stone monument'?

 

John

John,

 

You are quite right that this monument is still part of the original stone, the top has been removed, but this is still the original mark. We discussed this about a year and 1/2 ago and I stated at that time that this is the original mark, I would accept it as the corner if I had any boundary surveys to complete in the area. But the big issue is that this is a precise geodetic position, and I did finally concede that it probably is not in the exact same position.

 

The funny thing is that I was positive that this mark had been declared destroyed by NGS this past year, but now that I look again; they have relisted it as a valid mark.

 

CallawayMT

Share this post


Link to post

...But the big issue is that this is a precise geodetic position, and I did finally concede that it probably is not in the exact same position.

 

The funny thing is that I was positive that this mark had been declared destroyed by NGS this past year, but now that I look again; they have relisted it as a valid mark.

 

CallawayMT

 

Have they relisted RD3152 as valid or did they create a new listing that is not yet showing up on gc.com?

 

I visited this marker in June of 2004 but later decided not to "claim" it because of the conflict in the description. Do you think it is now safe to mark it as a find?

 

Regardless of found-or-destroyed this was an amazing site to visit knowing that this is the birthplace of all (?) Washington and Oregon legal descriptions. My place in Olympia, WA is connected to this spot. I couldn't stop weeping for over a week! (Not really.)

Share this post


Link to post

Getting back to the forum topic, I don't think anybody really likes to hear that their find may not actually be a find. And they especially may not want to hear it from what they consider to be some "benchmarking policeman". I for one, was contacted by BuckBrooke for some incorrect finds that I made, and I consider myself a better benchmarker because of it. Done the right way, some constructive advice can go a long way. After all, I did find my way to these forums, and still am quite interested in benchmarking.

Share this post


Link to post

What is really sad is when they are reported to the NGS as 'Found' by a GEOCACHER when they are actually destroyed.

 

NGS RD3152

 

GC.com RD3152

 

My GC.com Log

 

I sent an email to Deb Brown in June 2004 that this should be changed to destroyed but I probably should have also put a 'Not Found' log into the NGS.

 

I am sorry to hear this as sad news.

 

I reported a disk found in the stone.

This disk is set in a stone the proper size but not height.

As reported broken off in 1952.

I am not going to dig it out to see if the whole stone was there.

 

I just reported what I found at those coordinates and description.

 

At some point the disk was set in the top or broken off portion of the stone.

It was not updated into the NGS data base.

 

I myself do not try to second guess what is written down unless it is extremely incorrect.

We are here to update what we find.

 

If we go into a detailed query about what found means.

We found anything that has changed from the last reports........

 

The NGS has the final say on anything we report so we will see where this goes.

I agree it should be reported or marked as a reset mark.

Share this post


Link to post

Off topic reply:

 

The Willamette stone is probably a reset. The following quote is from Designorati.

 

"Another look at the Willamette Stone station mark, with clarification. The circumferential notations should be self-explanatory. The date in the top is the date of original survey; the one at bottom is the date this particular monument was placed. The numbers preceded by “S” note which sections of each surrounding township meet there, and the initial point itself is physically located at the intersection of the two lines"

 

This bottom date indicates that it should be a reset based on the July 25th 1988 date on the BM IMO (I don't know much so my opinion may be inaccurate in regards to this).

 

If you are interested there is a historic photo (1954) of the original mark in the Salem Public Library Archives and a photo from 1984 at a personal web site of some previous visitors. It is interesting to note that there is a disc in the 1984 pics but it doesn't appear to be the same disc that is there now.

 

The change in the last 52 years has been dramatic.

 

On Topic:

 

A year or so ago I was looking back at a BM "find" of mine and some guy named BuckBrooke :D had posted a note that what I (and others) had found was not what was described in the data sheet. My first thought was “who does this guy think he is, doesn’t he have anything better to do?". Then I re-read the description and realized he was right. I changed my "find" to a not found indicating that I had not found the mark and that it was most likely destroyed. I then sent off a thank you to BuckBrooke thanking him for the clarification. :D

 

I think most are honest mistakes. A gentle and kind clarification on the page itself is in order. I don't think anything else is needed.

Edited by TheBeanTeam

Share this post


Link to post

(I just about deleted this post after I put it together because I really am not trying to beat a dead horse (or benchmark) but figured I would go ahead and send it because if a metal disk placed by the park service in 1988 can be called a 'find' of 16-inch tall, 8-inch square stone post then what counts as a "not found"?)

 

Look close at the disk and you'll see it is set in a "Cut stone" that may or may not be 18" high. With the concrete surrounding both the plaque and stone marker it is hard to say how tall it is.

 

The marker type is "Stone Monument" and without being there in person the 'disk' is set in stone and not in concrete. How big the cut stone is, is hard to tell from the pictures. If they removed the 'Brass Screw' and replaced it with a 'disk' does it become a reset if the disk is put into the repaired 'stone monument'?

The 'cut stone' is Zero inches high. I went back and looked at the photos in GC.com and the stone is flush with the ground. And the photo from BeanTeam shows that if nothing else, that 16" of dirt was not mounded up to the top of the monument and a disk placed on the pointy spire of the monument.

 

Question. If a brass disk marked "benchmark 1903" is lost and a new one marked "benchmark 1908 - 1984" is placed over the same spot, should it be counted as a find of "benchmark 1903"?

 

You are quite right that this monument is still part of the original stone, the top has been removed, but this is still the original mark.

I guess I am not sure how we know that the "monument is still part of the original stone" - Nothing I read at the site indicates that anything was saved from the original stone or how they cut it down from 16" to 0" after it was vandalized.

 

I guess I am just confused since the discussion of a true 'find' here in the forum can get so technical. Here we have no idea if the whole monument was removed by vandals (or state park personnel after it was vandalized) and a flat stone with a shiny commemorative disk was placed by the park service (not any survey crew) and it is considered a find.

 

<sarcasm>

If I am looking for a 'chiseled square' and find a disk named 'chiseled square' near the location, would that count as 'found'?

</sarcasm>

 

And, BeanTeam - thanks for the photo!

 

261278709_d55641d21c_o.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

 

You are quite right that this monument is still part of the original stone, the top has been removed, but this is still the original mark.

I guess I am not sure how we know that the "monument is still part of the original stone" - Nothing I read at the site indicates that anything was saved from the original stone or how they cut it down from 16" to 0" after it was vandalized.

 

I guess I am just confused since the discussion of a true 'find' here in the forum can get so technical. Here we have no idea if the whole monument was removed by vandals (or state park personnel after it was vandalized) and a flat stone with a shiny commemorative disk was placed by the park service (not any survey crew) and it is considered a find.

 

 

261278709_d55641d21c_o.jpg

 

Because I have an email from one of the BLM surveyor's who worked on this project, and he stated that this is the bottom of the original setting with the Stainless disk inserted into the top.

 

Keep one thing in mind here, this is not just a bench mark or tri-station; this is a cadastral corner and the Initial Point for Washington and Oregon; by state law a Registered Land Surveyor or BLM Surveyor are the only people who can reset or rehabilitate this type of mark. This mark was properly referenced and is in its' original position as it was before any rehab work was performed around it.

 

CallawayMT

Share this post


Link to post

What is the difference between a tri-station that has the disk torn off, but the stem of the disk is still there and usable & this stone being broken off but the center of the cut stone is still there?

 

The triangulation station would be found in poor condition. Would this not be comparable conditions to the triangulation stem? The original point was the center of the cut stone and the center of the original cut stone is still there.

 

If there is an old drill hole that has a PID number and later there is a disk added to that drill hole, the PID number for that drill hole is still valid. The hole may have been filled with the stem of a disk, but it is still there. The reference point is still there, just the condition of it has changed.

 

The original cut stone was not set as an elevation marker so height of the stone can be compared to the height of the triangulation disk. If it has been shortened then the proper call would be found in poor condition, I think.

 

John

Share this post


Link to post

What is the difference between a tri-station that has the disk torn off, but the stem of the disk is still there and usable & this stone being broken off but the center of the cut stone is still there?

 

The triangulation station would be found in poor condition. Would this not be comparable conditions to the triangulation stem? The original point was the center of the cut stone and the center of the original cut stone is still there.

 

If there is an old drill hole that has a PID number and later there is a disk added to that drill hole, the PID number for that drill hole is still valid. The hole may have been filled with the stem of a disk, but it is still there. The reference point is still there, just the condition of it has changed.

 

The original cut stone was not set as an elevation marker so height of the stone can be compared to the height of the triangulation disk. If it has been shortened then the proper call would be found in poor condition, I think.

 

John

 

I agree with you John, this is in essentially the same postion, but even if a tri-station were torn out and then replaced with a new monument; it would then be a reset.

 

CallawayMT

Share this post


Link to post

I stand corrected. It would be good if the NGS history showed that it was the original stone that was cut down.

 

I would not register a disk that replaced a drill hole unless the NGS data sheet showed the history that this is what happened.

 

Maybe someone can forward Deb the email from the surveyor so that it can be included in the history.

Share this post


Link to post

Willamette Stone

 

I just thought I'd bump this up since someone recently inquired about a photo I took last year of the disk which is marking this initial point for Washington and Oregon (the so called Willamette Stone).

 

Did anyone at the NGS get back on this question (I guess to BDT or Callaway)? Is it worth another try?

Edited by Papa-Bear-NYC

Share this post


Link to post

Willamette Stone

 

I just thought I'd bump this up since someone recently inquired about a photo I took last year of the disk which is marking this initial point for Washington and Oregon (the so called Willamette Stone).

 

Did anyone at the NGS get back on this question (I guess to BDT or Callaway)? Is it worth another try?

 

PBNYC,

 

I see no change in the NGS record and I had not done any investigation into this mark. BDT does mention in his earlier post that he had sent out an inquiry to NGS.

 

As I mentioned during this and earlier posts, I don't feel that it is all that important to get this mark listed as destroyed or reset by NGS due to the fact that it is essentially in its' original position for all practical purposes that I, as a surveyor would want.

 

This station is NOT GPS'able as was listed by the power squadron on an earlier recovery and would not serve any real control purposes other than that as a cadastral corner, for which it is 100% valid for using in that case.

 

Without all of the blue booking work that would go with the requirements to get this monument listed as reset, the only other option for NGS would be to list it as destroyed. I would hate to see the data sheet disappear and then some people would miss out on the opportunity to come visit such a historic and political point for the states of Washington and Oregon.

 

Just my nickel's worth,

CallawayMT

Share this post


Link to post

I did get an interim reply from Deb and just now I forget the name of the person she said she referred my question to. I haven't gotten any further response and have long ago decided that I would not pursue this matter any further.

 

I definitely think it is not proper that some of us are logging this station as found even though it is no longer what's described in the datasheet, but on the other hand I figured that it would be somewhat in bad taste for me to continue to press for getting this historic station classified as destroyed for some of the same reasons that CallawayMT has stated, and because I have never been personally at the location. That said, I do agree with Papa-Bear-NYC that the station is destroyed. Since he bumped this old topic I will find my last message from Deb and send it to him. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post

Just adding another bit to the story of the Willamette Stone.

 

I stumbled upon a book that contained articles written by Karl Klooster for This Week Magazine called Round the Roses; Portland Past Perspectives. A great read for a local history buff like me but when I ran into the Benchmark article I couldn't believe it.

 

In a 1986 article he featured the Willamette stone. The article carried two photos of the stone that shows its state in 1986.

 

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_LgWQDdMeFcw/TRO33kRp83I/AAAAAAAAC1A/MH1pyhBuP-M/Willmette%20Stoneb.jpg

 

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_LgWQDdMeFcw/TRO36OHDmrI/AAAAAAAAC1E/8VlLf9nmqeo/Willmette%20Stone%20a.jpg

 

I have a scanned copy of the article on Picasa. If you click the magnifying glass option it will bring it up larger and in my browser if I right click I have an option to "zoom in" that makes the article very readable. If for some reason you can't view it and would like a copy send me a note and I'll get it to you. I have it in PDF form as well.

 

On another note in a separate thread jwahl provided some great history as well for this location that should be added to this discussion tread regarding the Willamette Stone.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

×
×
  • Create New...