Jump to content

Earthcaches - Cool or Lame?


ElectroQTed

Recommended Posts

I'm posting this Earthcache topic in the Canadian section as I have noticed a bunch of new ones in Ontario over the last couple of months.

 

I used to think Earthcaches were cool. They've brought me to places like the Cheltenham Badlands, the Sifton Bog, Niagara Falls, the Devil's Punchbowl, the Niagara Escarpment. I really enjoyed visiting these unique and interesting places.

 

Lately, in my own area, I've been brought to an Earthcache in a parking lot where large rocks have been strategically placed by man, another at a bend in a river...ho hum. These local earthcaches were "placed" by cachers not even from the area. I did these caches and emailed my answers to the specific questions asked, without so much as a reply as to whether or not I had the correct answers.

 

Just for $#!+$ and giggles, I googled some of the cache descriptions of the Earthcaches placed by these cachers and found them to be simply cut and pasted from Wikipedia or other sites. It seems that anyone can place an Earthcache anywhere on the planet, without even visiting the site, forget about replying to the requirements they have set out in the cache description, and never have to worry about maintenance. For me, Earthcaches have leapt up several notches on the lameness factor. What's your take?

Link to comment

Like every cache type, given time, people will find ways to make lame ones.

 

I archived my Earthcache when the education requirements were added because even though it had a cool writeup, it didn't fit in with the new idea.

 

Bottom line, some caches are really cool...some are lame. I can't say that Earthcaches are more or less likely to have lameness associated.

Link to comment

All I know is that a lot of good ones got killed and haven't come back. I had some ideas for some cool ones but now it is a PITA to get one approved. Plus I don't like the forced educational aspect of the new ones. Why not just have an optional link to read? So I liked the old way where you just just a cool spot and said "Oh Wow!" As far as lame ones, I haven't run across any myself, but I don't go out of my way to do them anymore either...

Edited by TrailGators
Link to comment

Which earthcache was in a parking lot.

 

I like the earthcaches that are in Atlantic Canada, can't say anything about what you have in Ont. but around these parts there cool.

 

I like the new educational part of earthcaches. LIke anything in geocaching there are different likes and dislikes between us. If you don't like the current earthcaches in your area try setting one up for yourself.

Link to comment

EarthCache = Traditional Cache without the container or logbook at the site.

EarthCache = Virtual Cache without the WOW being provided at the site.

 

I agree with ElectroQTed that many I've read in Ontario, all of the educational content is front end loaded and available from other sources online.

 

Almost every one I've done or read could have easily been made as a traditional cache or better yet as a stage in a multi.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for having some caches with educational content but there seems to be a whole different set of rules for EarthCaches. It doesn't matter where the person who posts them lives in relation to the EarthCache or if the EarthCache is really close to an existing Geocache.

 

All I know is that it is interesting to read the EarthCache pages and learn about the stuff, but the site is rarely more than a photo-op and the requirements for logging a find (?) hardly seem worthy.

 

And before anyone calls me on these statements, yes I own an EarthCache that could be a Multi and yes I think they belong better on Waymarking than Geocaching, and yes I think it is time to get rid of Virtual style items on Geocaching all together. No new news on those items.

 

:P The Blue Quasar

Link to comment

Earth caches are still very rare in my area. The one that I have done I completed before the earthcache changes, but it was really more of a drive by. I have browsed a couple that look really neat and am considering placing one myself at some point.

 

 

One comment, if you're starting to see lame earthcaches it's a possibility that it's people trying to just place one as the requirements for this:

 

 

http://www.geosociety.org/earthcache/ecMasters.htm

 

 

Not to slam the site or anything, I'm working towards getting my bronze.

Link to comment

ElectroQTed, sorry to hear that some are being published in your locale that are lame, that is really a pity :P .

So far all the Earthcaches we've been to or seen come up in BC have been superb choice locations. The cache listings are well researched and well written, (not copy pasted text) and are about really specific geological features like Black Tusk, Table Mountain, Burns Bog, White Rock, etc. I know our sole Earthcache on fossils took Chris weeks of photography, research and writing as if it was a paper to be published! Mind you, we both really enjoy geology and geography being makers of park map and interpretive signs, so we put the same kind of work into our Earthcache. We're really looking forward to going to Mt. St. Helen's Earthcache this summer and I know that won't be lame :) . Heck, there's a whole new lake up there that didn't exist before the erruption in May 1980.

Link to comment

Whether it is an Earthcache, a Virtual or any cache, it is all about my choice on how I choose to enjoy and experience a specific cache on a particular day. Sometimes we just have to slow down and take a time out to enjoy a specific cache area that we visit to have some fun and explore. We learn and see a lot when we slow down to enjoy a cache.

 

And if you really didn't enjoy a cache, why not state so in your log, but state it nicely.

Edited by res2100
Link to comment

Well, it looks like I am the proud owner of a “lame” earthcache (yes, it even contains pasted text!)

The area is off-limits for any kind of physical container, and due to its distance to other public areas it was not feasible to use it as a stage in a multi. It does have some (perhaps marginal?) geologic interest, so I made it into an earthcache.

It is a beautiful area that I wanted to share with others, and so far cachers have enjoyed it very much, and judging by the e-mails I’ve received, they’re learning something in the process.

I originally tried to reword the text, but found that the original site conveyed the information much more eloquently than I could.

Oh well. Consider it my earthcache version of a parking-lot lamppost micro. :D

Link to comment

Well, being from the same area as Ted, and knowing our discussions on the topic, I have to chime in that Ted is right on. In our area, there have been a few pop up that have no real significance, especially the parking area with rocks one last year (forget I beat Ted to the FTF on that one :D ).

 

I will also say that I have done a few cool ones up north and in other areas before though. I just think some people have a habit of placing a cache just for the sake of adding a digit to their "caches owned" tally. There is a a lot of crap out there and it will only get worse, IMHO, as new cachers come on board and there is fewer and fewer places to put a cache within city limits.

 

Lamposts and Earthcaches like this are just the start.

Link to comment
Like anything if you don't like the earthcaches then don't do them. I don't care if it is copy and pasted text as long as it teches me something new about the area.

 

Yeah, but the problem is you don't realize how lame they are until you get there. Sadly I've become a little disheartened with a lot of caches I've found over the last year or so. I've long extolled the benefits of what I call the 20 minute rule. That is it will take you at least 20 minutes to find the cache from where you started. This would preclude any drive-up, drive-by, hook-shot or otherwise lame road-side caches altogether, and may not score me points with a lot of people :(. When 'caching first started, and I speak from experience as being one of the first cachers, they all seemed to be in interesting locations where a hike was involved. There are still plenty of interesting locations out there yet to have caches. I know because I find them all the time when hiking.

Link to comment

Any type of cache can be lame. There are lame traditionals, multis, puzzles, earth, etc. etc. and what is lame to one person is not lame to another. Nature of the sport.

 

The more caches you do the more likely you are to come across lame ones.

 

JD

Link to comment

I don't mind earthcaches. But if earthcaches are allowed then IMO virtuals should be allowed. To me, they are the same thing. Interesting places that one might want to visit.

 

I think all caches can be used in a way that some will not like. Whether it be LPC's or caches with no trespassing signs posted or earthcaches where some dude stacked rocks or caches behind a dumpster, etc.

Link to comment

I'm posting this Earthcache topic in the Canadian section as I have noticed a bunch of new ones in Ontario over the last couple of months.

 

I used to think Earthcaches were cool. They've brought me to places like the Cheltenham Badlands, the Sifton Bog, Niagara Falls, the Devil's Punchbowl, the Niagara Escarpment. I really enjoyed visiting these unique and interesting places.

 

Lately, in my own area, I've been brought to an Earthcache in a parking lot where large rocks have been strategically placed by man, another at a bend in a river...ho hum. These local earthcaches were "placed" by cachers not even from the area. I did these caches and emailed my answers to the specific questions asked, without so much as a reply as to whether or not I had the correct answers.

 

Just for $#!+$ and giggles, I googled some of the cache descriptions of the Earthcaches placed by these cachers and found them to be simply cut and pasted from Wikipedia or other sites. It seems that anyone can place an Earthcache anywhere on the planet, without even visiting the site, forget about replying to the requirements they have set out in the cache description, and never have to worry about maintenance. For me, Earthcaches have leapt up several notches on the lameness factor. What's your take?

 

Pretty easy to figure out the caches in question. ;) One of these guys has an Earthcache in NY, and yes, it seems pretty obvious he did not visit the site to place the earthcache. He sure as heck never found any of the many nearby caches, including the physical one within 50 feet of his earthcache object, which he uses the same coords for his earthcache. Not to say he hadn't hiked there in the past, long before geocaching. By the way, this one is not a "lame" earthcahe at all, it's a nice hike, and pretty interesting.

 

Earthcaches and virtuals lead themselves to this sort of thing, I guess there's nothing you can do about it. It definately appears on the surface these guys are out for the number of earthcaches hidden in their profile. I still like the educational aspect of earthcaches, and feel they are subject to much more scrutiny in the review process than virtuals were in the "anything goes" period. Which I myself wouldn't know about, because I joined right about the time the infamous "WOW Factor" for virtuals was implemented. ;)

Link to comment

Yeah, but the problem is you don't realize how lame they are until you get there. Sadly I've become a little disheartened with a lot of caches I've found over the last year or so. I've long extolled the benefits of what I call the 20 minute rule. That is it will take you at least 20 minutes to find the cache from where you started. This would preclude any drive-up, drive-by, hook-shot or otherwise lame road-side caches altogether, and may not score me points with a lot of people ;). When 'caching first started, and I speak from experience as being one of the first cachers, they all seemed to be in interesting locations where a hike was involved. There are still plenty of interesting locations out there yet to have caches. I know because I find them all the time when hiking.

 

But with all those cool areas you talk about, there are obovious sign that they are getting damaged do to the traffic. Well that's my experience with a couple of my caches...made them into PM's to cut down on the traffic.

Link to comment

I originally tried to reword the text, but found that the original site conveyed the information much more eloquently than I could.

Oh well.

 

This is not a scientific journal where intellectual property is taken seriously. In fact, I'm sure the authors of the text would be happy to find out that their text may reach a wider audience through this medium. As long as credit/reference is given to the original authors, I see no problem with this.

Link to comment

 

Oh well. Consider it my earthcache version of a parking-lot lamppost micro. :anibad:

 

Hmmm. Now I'm left wondering how I can call attention to the limestone from the local quarry used in the construction of the WalMart in town :anibad:

 

Most of the limestone in eastern and southern Ontario are ~400 million year old, and much of it is rich in fossils. Take a look and see if you can find any!

Link to comment

 

Oh well. Consider it my earthcache version of a parking-lot lamppost micro. :anibad:

 

Hmmm. Now I'm left wondering how I can call attention to the limestone from the local quarry used in the construction of the WalMart in town :anibad:

 

Most of the limestone in eastern and southern Ontario are ~400 million year old, and much of it is rich in fossils. Take a look and see if you can find any!

 

I'll have to pass on that. I am severely allergic to WalMart.

Link to comment
Well, maybe mine's not so lame then! It does involve a km. long hike, through a very beautiful area.

I wouldn't consider that lame at all. If the cache container is secondary to the enjoyment had from getting there that's what its all about, IMO. I think some stashers have lost sight of this.

Any type of cache can be lame. There are lame traditionals, multis, puzzles, earth, etc. etc. and what is lame to one person is not lame to another.

Too true. One of the first caches I found was the lamest roadside I've seen. Complete with rusty coffee can and trashed trinkets inside. Subsequent finders posted glowing reports about it. Mind boggling. :rolleyes:

But with all those cool areas you talk about, there are obovious sign that they are getting damaged do<sic> to the traffic. Well that's my experience with a couple of my caches...made them into PM's to cut down on the traffic.

Not sure what PM means. But none of my stashes have been trashed to my knowledge. You have to put some thought into where they're placed knowing that there are going to be people all over the area looking for it. This is part of the reason I generally put my caches in rather obvious, but remote, places.

I'll have to pass on that. I am severely allergic to WalMart.

When I go to Walmart (infrequently) I play a game with myself called Spot the Mullet, Track Pants or Wife Beater shirt.

Link to comment

Like anything if you don't like the earthcaches then don't do them. {snip}

 

That is what I do. Last one I found was Nov 06. It was right after EarthCaches returned from Waymarking (rant on.. where they belong... /rant off) because of the promise that the requirements for all EC's had improved. Hardly, and to be fair to the creator the listing was originally a Waymark that was forced over to Geocaching.

 

Before that... Oct 06 and because I was over in NY and was Waymarking there but since EC's are basically the same thing (hmm... /rant off didn't work) and I like Dru a lot, as my family was willing to stop, it was worth it.

 

Before that... Aug 06 because I created it as a Waymark, but when it was forced back to Geocaching I promptly adopted it over to my buddy Jake39 (hmmm another Waymarker... why isn't that /rant working?)

 

I certainly hope those that enjoy EarthCaches are getting something out of them, but I find them very lacking after I leave my couch.

 

:anicute: The Blue Quasar

 

p.s. Coupar-Angus... you rock!

Edited by The Blue Quasar
Link to comment

I'm posting this Earthcache topic in the Canadian section as I have noticed a bunch of new ones in Ontario over the last couple of months.

 

I used to think Earthcaches were cool. They've brought me to places like the Cheltenham Badlands, the Sifton Bog, Niagara Falls, the Devil's Punchbowl, the Niagara Escarpment. I really enjoyed visiting these unique and interesting places.

 

Lately, in my own area, I've been brought to an Earthcache in a parking lot where large rocks have been strategically placed by man, another at a bend in a river...ho hum. These local earthcaches were "placed" by cachers not even from the area. I did these caches and emailed my answers to the specific questions asked, without so much as a reply as to whether or not I had the correct answers.

 

Just for $#!+$ and giggles, I googled some of the cache descriptions of the Earthcaches placed by these cachers and found them to be simply cut and pasted from Wikipedia or other sites. It seems that anyone can place an Earthcache anywhere on the planet, without even visiting the site, forget about replying to the requirements they have set out in the cache description, and never have to worry about maintenance. For me, Earthcaches have leapt up several notches on the lameness factor. What's your take?

 

I, as an aspiring geologist, love the idea of earthcaches. When they are they are done well, they are my favorite type of cache. Given the new requirements, earthcaches can and should be among the more spectacular and/or educational caches out there. In my experience, many (but certainly not all) earthcaches out there actually do feature a geologically-interesting site. The problem is, many people who submit earthcaches for publication are not geologists (which is obviously not a requirement), but more importantly, they do not do the necessary research to actually be able to explain the 'WoW factor' to the layperson. I'm not in anyway saying that only geologists should submit earthcaches, but I am saying that earthcaches, given their educational nature, should require more attention to detail in the write-up on behalf of the author in order to ensure every finder be able to understand the elusive wow-factor so many hold dear. Take my earthcache (GCZDAF: Mazama Ash - Edmonton ) for example. This cache took by far the longest of any of my caches to develop, and I didn't even need to set a physical cache. Furthermore, the ash horizon that I ask the finders to seek out is a mere 1-2 cm thick among a 2-3 m thick exposure of flood plain deposits from the North Saskatchewan. The wow factor in this earthcache that I hope most finders take away with them is that the ash was spewed out of a volcano in Oregon 6800 years ago, and was carried by winds all the way to Edmonton! If finders understand this, this seemingly insignificant horizon becomes much more spectacular. I would hope (and expect) that other developers of earthcaches, regardless of the grandeur of the highlighted feature, would be able to explain the attraction well enough for subsequent finders to say 'wow!'

Edited by shearzone
Link to comment

I, as an aspiring geologist, love the idea of earthcaches. When they are they are done well, they are my favorite type of cache. Given the new requirements, earthcaches can and should be among the more spectacular and/or educational caches out there. In my experience, many (but certainly not all) earthcaches out there actually do feature a geologically-interesting site. The problem is, many people who submit earthcaches for publication are not geologists (which is obviously not a requirement), but more importantly, they do not do the necessary research to actually be able to explain the 'WoW factor' to the layperson. I'm not in anyway saying that only geologists should submit earthcaches, but I am saying that earthcaches, given their educational nature, should require more attention to detail in the write-up on behalf of the author in order to ensure every finder be able to understand the elusive wow-factor so many hold dear. Take my earthcache (GCZDAF: Mazama Ash - Edmonton ) for example. This cache took by far the longest of any of my caches to develop, and I didn't even need to set a physical cache. Furthermore, the ash horizon that I ask the finders to seek out is a mere 1-2 cm thick among a 2-3 m thick exposure of flood plain deposits from the North Saskatchewan. The wow factor in this earthcache that I hope most finders take away with them is that the ash was spewed out of a volcano in Oregon 6800 years ago, and was carried by winds all the way to Edmonton! If finders understand this, this seemingly insignificant horizon becomes much more spectacular. I would hope (and expect) that other developers of earthcaches, regardless of the grandeur of the highlighted feature, would be able to explain the attraction well enough for subsequent finders to say 'wow!'

<_<:P:P

Your earthcache in Edmonton sounds great and is exactly why we love finding earthcaches - the 'wow factor'!

Link to comment
But with all those cool areas you talk about, there are obovious sign that they are getting damaged do<sic> to the traffic. Well that's my experience with a couple of my caches...made them into PM's to cut down on the traffic.
Not sure what PM means. But none of my stashes have been trashed to my knowledge. You have to put some thought into where they're placed knowing that there are going to be people all over the area looking for it. This is part of the reason I generally put my caches in rather obvious, but remote, places.

 

Premium Member ;)

Link to comment

I definitely think EarthCaches are cool. I placed the first EarthCache in Manitoba (Dunes Day - GC12902) back in April and now we have 5 including my new one on the Manitoba Tyndallstone (GC12TPF).

 

Dunes Day requires a 7 km hike through sand dunes to find the answers to the questions. This is a protected area where no physical caches would be allowed, but it is also one of my favourite locations to hike in Manitoba.

 

The Manitoba Tyndallstone EarthCache can almost be done without having to get out of your car. It is also wheelchair accessible and could be done on foot or by bike if someone chose to.

 

As I am not a geologist, I rely on information from Wikipedia and other sources to add the educational component. The WOW part of it just comes from the fact that they are things that I find interesting and I hope to share with others.

Link to comment

I personally like earth caches (i have only found 6) the only one I found a bit lame (well not that bad) was in Lewiston, NY

 

Before the owner changed the requirements you just have to photograph it somewhere in lewiston, I did it while getting gas after crossing over just took a picture of it in the distance.

 

There was one in PA i tried to do on the way home from GW5 (The most Radio active town in America) that one seemed cool but did not have time. Hey according to the main site for earth caches I qualify for the Bronze pin!

Link to comment

I've only done 4 earthcaches and I've placed one. I love them. I visit Niagara Falls a few times each year and because of geocaching and earthcaches, I walked down a million steps to the whirlpool yesterday. I had no idea that the whirlpool changes direction. It was breathtaking - the scenery as well as the climb! A while back I did the Muskoka Potholes in Gravenhurst - again, a spot I had no idea existed. Thanks to everyone who places an earthcache for my family and I to discover.

Link to comment

I think I would qualify as an Earthcache fanatic. I've set up only 105, waiting for final approval from the NPS on 3 more and will be going to another NP in July to set up between 5 and 10. Someday I'll get out and visit some more. I think in that list there are a few that would be of interest to only the truly geologically inclined, making them lame to others. But as my wife as mentioned, half the caches are below average, and a full quarter are in the bottom quartile. You just can’t get around it.

 

Of the loggers, most are quite positive about the earthcaches and make comments about what they learned, how surprised they were about the location, or just plain enjoyed them. And there are others that send the basic logging requirements and say they made it to the cache. Everyone play the game the way you enjoy it.

Link to comment

I just did Wasaga Dunes this morning. It's a most excellent earthcache.

 

Mine are cool [:D]

 

Ones I have done are cool as well, but there have been ones I have passed on because I didnt think they were particularly interesting. Such is caching!

 

Yours are well organized, interesting and edumacational. That's what I've liked so far about the 2 earthcaches that I've done...both yours.

Link to comment

I have to agree, earthcaches are getting on my bad side.

I guess the idea is OK.

The thing I dont like is that several have popped up in my area, and they all seem to be good spots to put an actual cache. Now those spots are taken up by a "virtual".

I can see how the category will become abused this way.

I think earthcaches should ONLY be used where an actual container placement is impossible or taboo.

Not to mention, if they bothered to make a seperate website to "administer", submit, and search them, then what the heck are they doing on GC.com?

Seems like cross posting caches to me, which is frowned upon by TPTB, unless of course, they have their fingers in the other site, or there is $$ to be made.

 

Just my take.

Link to comment

The thing I dont like is that several have popped up in my area, and they all seem to be good spots to put an actual cache. Now those spots are taken up by a "virtual".

Earthcaches and Virtuals do not count against the 0.1 mile proximity rule. Earthcaches and any traditional, multi, part of a multi, etc, can (and have been) right on top of eachother.

 

Next reason....

Link to comment

Not to mention, if they bothered to make a seperate website to "administer", submit, and search them, then what the heck are they doing on GC.com?

 

The Geological Society of America, that controls earthcaches, are an organization, yes. But they are a gc.com entity just like you and I. They are permitted to post their caches in the same manner that anyone of us has to, however, once they publish a cache they offer it for adoption to the person who researched it. They don't draught the entries, nor do they search for, or research any of the earthcaches that are posted. As I perceive it, they assist gc.com in regulating the criteria for a type of cache.

 

Just my take.

Link to comment

I can't help thinking it would be better to place a real cache somewhere nearby and tell us on the cache page about the amazing place where the cache couldn't have gone. Then we can make up our own minds whether we want to go take a look, and we've had a proper cache in the meantime.

 

Obviously that doesn't apply when the Earthcache and the surrounding 1056ft (diameter) is all totally within an un-cache-able area.

 

Earthcaches don't have all the ingredients of a proper cache. Yes ok there's coordinates and a GPS journey, and a nice place to go to, it's educational and someone's shared their knowledge with us, and we get a smiley point... but there's no FIND.. no cache.. no log.. no trades.. etc. That's how I see it, but it's not a particularly strongly held view and I don't want to upset anyone over it :rolleyes:

Edited by Iwuzere
Link to comment

I have to agree, earthcaches are getting on my bad side.

I guess the idea is OK.

The thing I dont like is that several have popped up in my area, and they all seem to be good spots to put an actual cache. Now those spots are taken up by a "virtual".

I can see how the category will become abused this way.

I think earthcaches should ONLY be used where an actual container placement is impossible or taboo.

Not to mention, if they bothered to make a seperate website to "administer", submit, and search them, then what the heck are they doing on GC.com?

Seems like cross posting caches to me, which is frowned upon by TPTB, unless of course, they have their fingers in the other site, or there is $$ to be made.

 

Just my take.

 

dadgum somebody beat me to the fact you haven't logged any caches yet

Link to comment

 

dadgum somebody beat me to the fact you haven't logged any caches yet

 

Wow...pretty ignorant statement.

Just because I show no caches found under my profile, my opinion means nothing?

 

The OP asked for opinions on whether people thought earthcaches were lame or not.

 

I gave my opinion. Granted, someone pointed out one of my reasons was not justified, and one I did not know about.

 

I guess I must have nudged your soapbox while you were busy spouting off about how great earthcaches are, and people who have negativity toward them must be crazy.

 

I guess the only purpose in this thread is to sucker in people who may have something negative to say about earthcaches, so you crazies who embrace them can put other peoples opinions down.

 

Nice.

Link to comment

Before this goes any further, please keep to the forum guidelines.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?act=boardrules

 

Respect: Respect the guidelines for forum usage, and site usage. Respect Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, yourself, fellow community members, and guests on these boards. Whether a community member has one post or 5,000 posts, they deserve the same respect.

 

Thanks.

Link to comment

Speaking of lame caches...

 

I was on a business trip to San Diego last week and thought I'd go out and do some caching. I was just looking at my downloaded tracks and shaking my head (in disgust). I attempted to find about 10 caches but didn't bother with any of them. Here's a summary of some of the areas they were located in:

 

- shopping plaza food court

- construction site

- highway embankment

- public school property

- fountain

- front lawn of house (presumably attached to fire hydrant)

 

Crappy caches like these will definitely be the death of this hobby. If things don't get better its destined to become the next trainspotting.

 

I guess I should add justification to my 20 minute rule as well. :smile: Colour me shallow, but I don't fancy spending 20 minutes to hike to a fire hydrant, road sign or otherwise un-interesting location.

 

If anyone is interested in taking this in a new & fresh direction please contact me off-list.

 

C-A

Link to comment

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...
×
×
  • Create New...