Jump to content

Premium members should not have to see ads


klossner
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

If you see anything objectionable please contact us.
I don't mean to sound snarky, but the ads themselves are objectionable.

No other web site makes paid subscribers look at commercials. Please restrict these to non-paying members.

 

Honestly, I dont think they're too bad. They all have something to do with geocaching and nothing I've seen is "objectionable". Although getting rid of them would be nice, as an creator and owner of another geocaching website, I know it can be hard. They're a good source of income. If more people would become premium members, mabey you wouldn't need them, but right now I dont have any problem with them and I havent seen anyone else have any problems with them.

Link to comment
If you see anything objectionable please contact us.
I don't mean to sound snarky, but the ads themselves are objectionable.

No other web site makes paid subscribers look at commercials. Please restrict these to non-paying members.

 

Unfortunately, you didn't achieve your goal. You sound "snarky" if you object to that single ad that's in the left column. Many other websites make subscribers look at ads which are much more intrusive than these and often objectionable.

 

Logging on as a non-subscriber and having an ad inserted after every third cach listed on the page, now that's objectionable! Are you sure you are logging on properly to your paid account?

 

RATTLEBARS

Link to comment

Our goal with the new ad program is twofold. We are trying to generate revenue in order to improve and maintain the website on an ongoing basis and we are also trying to increase the relevancy of the ads so that they actually provide a benefit to our members.

 

The amount of ads currently displayed is reduced significantly for Premium Members. Based on this test, we're going to figure out out to proceed from here. Thank you for bearing with us.

Link to comment

Recently Google ads were mistakenly placed on cache pages for ALL to see. They were removed fairly quickly. Jeremy did indicate that Yahoo ads were going to be placed for ALL to see, on a trial basis. This is what we are seeing now.

 

Jeremy's comment on Yahoo ads

 

The Yahoo ads don't bother me. If they pay for development time to improve the site, I like them!

 

New thread by Jeremy to explain Yahoo ads

Edited by Cardinal Red
Link to comment

The amount of ads currently displayed is reduced significantly for Premium Members. Based on this test, we're going to figure out out to proceed from here. Thank you for bearing with us.

 

The ads are not intrusive enough to warrant any changes if the test works for you. In fact, they are not intrusive at all.

Link to comment

Oh I see them now ;)

 

The one on the left has been there for awhile I believe and not noticeable to me. The one on the right isn't bad either. Not sure what 46157 has to do with geocaching though.

It's definately not offending and its from Southern CA and I'm east of Sacramento.

Link to comment

Our goal with the new ad program is twofold. We are trying to generate revenue in order to improve and maintain the website on an ongoing basis and we are also trying to increase the relevancy of the ads so that they actually provide a benefit to our members.

 

As a Premium Member, I really object to having ads pushed on me after already paying for the service. I consider it like double jeopardy. Do one (encourage PMs), do the other (push ads), but doing both seems downright greedy.

 

And please, in rationalizing the change, please don't try and sell it to me as if you're doing me a favor. When you write "we are also trying to increase the relevancy of the ads so that they actually provide a benefit to our members," you're acting really quite condescending to your patrons. Sorry, but I've been watching TV and reading magazines and newspapers and listening to the radio for over 30 years now, and I've been surfing the net before it was cool, using LYNX back in the day, before Mosaic and graphics became cool...and I've YET to buy anything as a result of an ad pushed on me. Sure, sure, we can debate the theory and usefullness of advertising as a medium, but sorry, I'm never going to click on any ads you push on me. So please don't sell your new revenue generating program as something that's good for me. What's good for me is removing the ads.

 

My two copper,

MrW.

Link to comment
If you see anything objectionable please contact us.
I don't mean to sound snarky, but the ads themselves are objectionable.

No other web site makes paid subscribers look at commercials. Please restrict these to non-paying members.

 

Honestly, I dont think they're too bad. They all have something to do with geocaching and nothing I've seen is "objectionable". Although getting rid of them would be nice, as an creator and owner of another geocaching website, I know it can be hard. They're a good source of income. If more people would become premium members, mabey you wouldn't need them, but right now I dont have any problem with them and I havent seen anyone else have any problems with them.

I don't see how you can say "If more people would become premium members, maybe you wouldn't need them", unless you have some insight not given everyone. I was under the impression that Groundspeak doesn't really anything about its finances, no number of PMs, no amount of gc.com branded stuff sold, no firm number on what is paid to keep the website running or the salaries of paid employees. That to me makes it very hard to decide if new adds are indeed good sources of needed income that help keep the site going and/or improve it, or just extra revenue that could be done away with.

Don't get me wrong, I want to see the website continue. I even have no problem with Groundspeak (or other companies too) making money from geocaching. But can gc.com get this done without so many ads? How about with a little less drama? This 'is this greed or not' seems to come up every time there is a change in features be it maps, ads, etc. To me its kinda like buying something and then getting a second letter later saying 'we didn't make as much as we though off this, care to pay more?' I see no way for the average user to see if the business is really that hard up, or if its some sort of guilt based fleecing.

Link to comment

First off, I am a premium member and I would rather see the ads them have to pay more, money is tight. I also realize the expense in keeping this up and running is alot more them what we pay. Therefore, run the ads, they don't bother me.

Link to comment
If you see anything objectionable please contact us.
I don't mean to sound snarky, but the ads themselves are objectionable.

Ummm, you sounded snarky. Sorry. This observation comes from someone who has been a premium member since 2002. It was $30 per year then, and it's $30 per year now, despite vastly higher costs and vastly better services for the money. How much more would you be willing to pay in order to have no tiny Yahoo ad in the right hand column? What other recreational activities or organizations do you participate in where the cost, dues, etc. haven't risen a dime in six years?

 

No other web site makes paid subscribers look at commercials. Please restrict these to non-paying members.

I beg to differ. Really, this is funny. There are commercials all over the internet, including sites where I pay to be a member (example: NeoPets). One of the reasons I like Geocaching.com so much is that it tries so hard to keep the ads/commercialism down to a bare minimum.

 

I've clicked on a few Google ads and found them useful and interesting. My early review of the Yahoo ads is that many use a common technique to "localize" the ad. I picked caches in several different cities, and the ad for each one was about a mortgage refinancing offer in that city... all leading to the same website. If the ad generator knows the location they simply plug that city's name into the tag line.

Link to comment

I never even noticed the tiny ad in the right column before. How long has it been there???? It's right under the attributes.... I had to hunt for it. Beats the heck out of a pop up or slide in or whatever new flash trick that's around the corner....

 

Maybe I shouldn't say that.... might give ideas to the PTB.

 

The Google ads on the page yer reading this on right now are easy enough to ignore (upper right corner). At least they scroll off the page after the first post or so..... (there's a way to fix that, but let's not, OK?)

 

Oh, and that "Doing me a favor by having the ads be 'relevant'" gave me a good horse laugh :):D tonight. Thanks for the entertainment! :huh:

 

RATTLEBARS

Link to comment

I'd rather just pay a few bucks more per month and avoid the ads.

 

Since Groundspeak goes to such great lengths to make sure that caches themselves have no commercial value, advertising on the cache pages seems a little ... I don't know ... just wrong somehow.

 

Well said.

 

I'd pay double to keep the ads away - I really don't need to refinance the home I don't own anyway. At least move the ad so it's below the cache inventory...

Link to comment

How much more would you be willing to pay in order to have no tiny Yahoo ad in the right hand column?

 

$10 a month without even flinching. I get $10 worth of entertainment out of a single cache sometimes, not to mention an entire day's worth. It'd be the best $10 I spend on any given month, that's for sure.

 

And I realize that not everyone can afford that. So, maybe it's time for a three-tiered membership. Or a simple, open ended "pay what you think it's worth" subscription option.

 

Anything to keep more ads off of the cache pages. I never minded the "house ads" on the left, because they're out of the way, and 100% geocaching related, but can we please draw the line somewhere? Sticking random Yahoo or Google ads right between the attributes and inventory is pretty intrusive. My eye noticed it within seconds of going to my first cache page this evening.

 

FWIW.

Link to comment

A fast look shows me these. As I've said before I mostly ignore them but here's a few I just saw.

Ad on a cache page for GPSs and compasses - not terribly objectionable. That's relavant

Ad on a cache page for local real estate - objectionable. That relates to caching how?

Ad on the front page for:

lowermybills.com -objectionable anytime

geeksquad.com - kinda dumb

myeasyrewards.com for a free ipod - highly objectionable. Scam.

Edited by hairball45
Link to comment

I pay for cable, true. If I pay for a specific channel, oh, say HBO then no, that shouldn't have ads except maybe for itself. The "free" channels I can go to the kitchen and get a beer while the commercials run. Paying for premium services I shouldn't get ads for cheap car insurance, Preparation H, a variety of internet scammers, or sub-prime mortgages. Ads that relate to the specific service - movies on HBO or GPS units or camoed pinecone cache containers on GC.com don't strike me as a problem.

Just my spin on the thing. And I don't suppose four bucks a month instead of three would kill me.

Link to comment

I don't see how you can say "If more people would become premium members, maybe you wouldn't need them", unless you have some insight not given everyone. I was under the impression that Groundspeak doesn't really anything about its finances, no number of PMs, no amount of gc.com branded stuff sold, no firm number on what is paid to keep the website running or the salaries of paid employees.

 

I would imagine that this information is not available to us because we have no need for itm nor is it any of our business.

 

That to me makes it very hard to decide if new adds are indeed good sources of needed income that help

keep the site going and/or improve it, or just extra revenue that could be done away with.

 

How offensive! Based on this statement, can we all assume that any money you make from your employer, interest or any investments beyond your basic bills and needs is returned and can be "done away with"?

 

Don't get me wrong, I want to see the website continue. I even have no problem with Groundspeak (or other companies too) making money from geocaching. But can gc.com get this done without so many ads? How about with a little less drama? This 'is this greed or not' seems to come up every time there is a change in features be it maps, ads, etc. To me its kinda like buying something and then getting a second letter later saying 'we didn't make as much as we though off this, care to pay more?'

 

I get these all the time. Satellite wants me to up my package or DVR, insurance wants me to buy extras, cellphone wants me to upgrade, big box stores want me to buy the etended warranty, etc. I either purchase or say no. Easy enough.

 

I see no way for the average user to see if the business is really that hard up, or if its some sort of guilt based fleecing.

 

Again, none of our business. We have no need to know. There are plenty of ways to either ignore the ads or not even have them pop up. One of the best ways is to not use the service if it adopts policies that are so offensive.

 

It is truly hard to fathom that Jeremy and company are going to be able to buy big houses, planes, cars, ets. off of what they make from GC. If they do, more power to them, however since I do not hold stock or interest, they are under no obligation to give me details.

 

If these ads start to bog down the system, then we have something to say. Right now, that does not seem to be the case.

Link to comment

The Discovery Channel is on cable. I pay for cable TV. The Discovery Channel shouldn't have advertisements.

 

Sounds kinda silly. :huh:

 

From what I understand, cable was originally commercial free way back in the day (before my time), then marketers realized that there was a big advertising void in people's lives that needed to be filled.

 

Personally I think there's too much advertising in our lives already; we don't need to keep finding ways to squeeze in more. But I'll get off the soapbox. Regarding the ads on the site, I've always liked the ad banner on the left side because it's almost always geocaching related, it usually features products or services that I'm interested in (such as coin vendors that I've bought from), and the ads themselves are graphically interesting but not too much so to flashy or intrusive. The Yahoo ads, on the other hand, are just the same old ad filler that you get on any website. My brief experience with them is similar to Hairball45's: many of them are for things like mortgage or real estate services in <insert city here>, none of which I'm remotely interested in.

Link to comment

I pay for cable, true. If I pay for a specific channel, oh, say HBO then no, that shouldn't have ads except maybe for itself. The "free" channels I can go to the kitchen and get a beer while the commercials run. Paying for premium services I shouldn't get ads for cheap car insurance, Preparation H, a variety of internet scammers, or sub-prime mortgages. Ads that relate to the specific service - movies on HBO or GPS units or camoed pinecone cache containers on GC.com don't strike me as a problem.

Just my spin on the thing. And I don't suppose four bucks a month instead of three would kill me.

 

And is HBO $30 a year?

 

I have no problem with them throwing in a few ads here and there in efforts to keep the membership fee low and to keep improving the service.

Link to comment

No, of course HBO isn't $30. Actually since we aren't often around to watch it, it isn't here at all. I don't object completely to GC doing the ads either. It is appropriateness and relevance that I am looking for. I don't expect cigarette ads in medical publications and I don't expect ads for scams on CG.

Link to comment

It would be nice if, instead of turning this into YA analogy-filled snarkfest, we could simply state our thoughts on the ads, what we'd rather see if we dislike them, and hope for some cogent responses from TPTB.

 

Let's stay focused, and maybe this thread can provide exactly the kind of feedback they want, instead of just being another train wreck.

Link to comment

Personally, I don't like the ads. Yesterday when I was logging finds on some caches, there were ads for Refinancing my Home. That has nothing to do with Geocaching and since I don't even own an Home, it doesn't relate to me at all.

Escondido CA Refinance Rates

$400,000 Loan for only $1297/month. Get 4 FREE Quotes and Save.

www.RefinanceSave.com

Ads by Yahoo!

In fact, that particular ad is offensive to me because of my financial situation . . . :huh:

 

I agree the ads, if they have to be there, should be targeted for Geocaching, or for things we might need or want (Outdoor Gear, GPS units, Jeeps, etc.) I would also prefer if the ad was moved down below "The Inventory."

Link to comment

Personally, I don't like the ads. Yesterday when I was logging finds on some caches, there were ads for Refinancing my Home. That has nothing to do with Geocaching and since I don't even own an Home, it doesn't relate to me at all.

Escondido CA Refinance Rates

$400,000 Loan for only $1297/month. Get 4 FREE Quotes and Save.

www.RefinanceSave.com

Ads by Yahoo!

In fact, that particular ad is offensive to me because of my financial situation . . . :huh:

 

I agree the ads, if they have to be there, should be targeted for Geocaching, or for things we might need or want (Outdoor Gear, GPS units, Jeeps, etc.) I would also prefer if the ad was moved down below "The Inventory."

Geocaching.com is in a somewhat unique situation because every cache page is a associated with a geographic location. This gives Yahoo! an opportunity to run adds that are targeted to the area near the cache. The assumption is that most people looking for caches in or near Escondido live in the area and some of them own homes there. Not everyone is looking to refinance their home, but at least you're not seeing ads to refinance your home in Silver Springs, MD. The problem is that Yahoo! hasn't signed up many local business yet. So Escondido, CA and Silver Springs, MD are probably seeing ads by the same mortgage company (although it may show different rates that are based on location).

 

If Yahoo! can attract more local businesses to buy ads, it might be neat to see a local restaurant or an antiques store that you might want to stop at when you are out caching.

 

Another thing that makes this kind of internet ad less annoying than television ads and even full page newspaper ads is that they are relatively unobtrusive. If they always appear in the same place on the page you can train yourself to ignore them. And you don't have to click the link if you're not interested in the product.

Link to comment

...And please, in rationalizing the change, please don't try and sell it to me as if you're doing me a favor. When you write "we are also trying to increase the relevancy of the ads so that they actually provide a benefit to our members," you're acting really quite condescending to your patrons. Sorry, but I've been watching TV and reading magazines and newspapers and listening to the radio for over 30 years now, and I've been surfing the net before it was cool, using LYNX back in the day, before Mosaic and graphics became cool...and I've YET to buy anything as a result of an ad pushed on me. Sure, sure, we can debate the theory and usefullness of advertising as a medium, but sorry, I'm never going to click on any ads you push on me. So please don't sell your new revenue generating program as something that's good for me. What's good for me is removing the ads.

 

Since you are someone who has never in thirty years ever purchased something you've seen in a banner advertisement, I can see why you might take it as condescending. It was not condescending. It was, however, directed towards the large number of our other patrons who do consider purchasing something they've seen in a banner ad if it is relevant and if it is something they are interested in purchasing.

 

I believe we've accomplished that to some degree with the left hand banners. During this test, we will continue to 'try' to increase the relevancy and corresponding benefit of these ads from Yahoo!. It may work, it may not. That is why it is a test and that is why we will continue to listen to feedback posted here and elsewhere in our forums.

 

For everyone, please feel free to continue to not click on the ads if they do not interest you and please feel free to become or remain a Premium Member only if there is value in it for you. Based on this test and associated feedback from everyone, we'll decide what to do next.

 

Keep the feedback coming, thanks.

Link to comment

I'm the type of person who despises ads, but the ads here are very unobtrusive and don't bother me at all. On the cache pages the ad is very small, and nestles right between the map and inventory, it's not as if it's taking up a whole column of the page as many sites implement. On the main site you have the little ad below the menu, but again it's not taking up it's own space, only utilizing what would be un-used. The ad here on the forum nestles up next to the Groundspeak logo, again not robbing us of any space. Most other large sites I frequent will have columns dedicated to ads, intermediate ad-splash pages shown when links are clicked, and those ads that start showing video/audio at inopportune times. Ads here are few and tastefully implemented.

 

For $3 a month, consider how many endless hours of entertainment you get from this site. So long as the ads stay somewhat relevant and unobtrusive, and helps keep GC.com going, I'm happy.

Link to comment

Whoa, nobody direct yahoo to this thread (I'm about to say their advertising dollars aren't paying off) I just went to check out a cache page and see what all the fuss is about....I have never noticed that ad there before.

 

The one on the left hand side though, i notice all the time and think it's just fine! it's geocaching related. I've even clicked on those ads on numerous occasions (okay, so I've got a growing geocoin addiction)

I've actually clicked the little arrow (which btw doesn't seem to be working for me right now) to click through the ads and get back to something that caught my eye but I didn't open right then..

 

The google ads (at lease at the moment) at the top of the forums aren't really that targeted but I imagine they're still working on it, b/c I've found google ads to be very good. I suppose in my gmail account, googles formula has a lot more words to work with, but I find myself clicking on those ads all the time. I've found some things that I was very interested in, bought some things, found a source I go back to regularly. I think google is a good way to go.. (but I'm still glad I don't have to see them between cache listings)

Link to comment

I still don't see what all the action is all about...

 

I still have yet to see the "new" adds on any cache pages I look at (new and old). The ad I see is still the same set of adds I have always seen on cache pages since I started caching and since I started paying for premium services (little box on the left side under the "menu")...

 

I will wait and see I guess...

Link to comment

My eye noticed it within seconds of going to my first cache page this evening.

 

FWIW.

 

 

I gotta agree on this one. I noticed it on the first cache page I opened up this morning instantly. I guess if the idea was to get people to see the ad...you picked a good location. It does seem to kind of break up the page though.

Link to comment

No big deal, just because they show you ads doesn't mean you have to click on them or patronize the site the ad is for.

I agree . . . but these ads are on my own cache pages, as well as other people's cache pages. I have spent time formatting some of my cache pages to make them look good. I am used to seeing ads on the left hand side of the page, but now this ad for "Mortgage Refinancing" is over on the right hand side above the Inventory List for my cache and above the list of Bookmark Lists my cache is on.

 

I would prefer the ad be both relevant, and moved from that position, if it must be on my cache pages.

Link to comment

No big deal, just because they show you ads doesn't mean you have to click on them or patronize the site the ad is for.

I agree . . . but these ads are on my own cache pages, as well as other people's cache pages. I have spent time formatting some of my cache pages to make them look good. I am used to seeing ads on the left hand side of the page, but now this ad for "Mortgage Refinancing" is over on the right hand side above the Inventory List for my cache and above the list of Bookmark Lists my cache is on.

 

I would prefer the ad be both relevant, and moved from that position, if it must be on my cache pages.

I can see your point in that case.

Link to comment

I have spent time formatting some of my cache pages to make them look good. I am used to seeing ads on the left hand side of the page, but now this ad for "Mortgage Refinancing" is over on the right hand side above the Inventory List for my cache and above the list of Bookmark Lists my cache is on.

 

I would prefer the ad be both relevant, and moved from that position, if it must be on my cache pages.

 

I'm not sure how much of a problem this is, since the site determines everything that goes in the right-hand column. If you've formatted your page so that things line up with the exact top and bottom of the attributes and inventory sections then I admire your dedication, but whenever those features change slightly you will have some maintenance to do.

 

Meanwhile, I was going to say, I can't see the Yahoo! ads at all. Then I clicked on a cache which is located in the US and saw one. For the moment, caches in Canada and Europe don't seem to have them, at least for Premium Members. (Just in case anyone else is wondering why they can't see them!)

 

Frankly, if the ads are irrelevant to me, I welcome it. I love to see a movie on TV where none of the ads match products which I buy - I feel like I'm getting the movie for nothing.

Link to comment

I'd rather just pay a few bucks more per month and avoid the ads.

 

Since Groundspeak goes to such great lengths to make sure that caches themselves have no commercial value, advertising on the cache pages seems a little ... I don't know ... just wrong somehow.

 

Well said.

 

I'd pay double to keep the ads away - I really don't need to refinance the home I don't own anyway. At least move the ad so it's below the cache inventory...

 

I'm in accord. Frankly, I now feel that I was lead to create a premium account under somewhat false pretenses.

 

That said, my primary interest in becoming a premium member was and remains in the interest of supporting GC.com as the main hub for this hobby that I enjoy -- I'm open to continuing that support, even by increasing my dues payments in lieu of advertisements. Secondly, my goal in becoming a premium member was to avoid seeing advertisements, which I regard as visually accosting and wasteful (of space, printer ink and bandwidth).

 

If GC.com is to continue advertising to premium members, then I will personally consider one of the primary benefits to a premium membership gone, which may force me to reevaluate my status as a premium member whence it expires in September 2008.

 

I hope in the intervening time, GC.com closely considers the effect of placing ads on premium members views. In my opinion, GC.com may benefit from short term gains in profits, but may well lose out on potential membership dollars in the long term.

Edited by bhoard
Link to comment
Escondido CA Refinance Rates

$400,000 Loan for only $1297/month. Get 4 FREE Quotes and Save.

www.xxx.com

Ads by Yahoo!

In fact, that particular ad is offensive to me because of my financial situation . . . :unsure:

 

I agree the ads, if they have to be there, should be targeted for Geocaching, or for things we might need or want (Outdoor Gear, GPS units, Jeeps, etc.) I would also prefer if the ad was moved down below "The Inventory."

 

Wait..think this through. You do not like this ad because your finances are not what you would like them to be, at least that is what I get from your message.

 

GC has found another revenue source. I won't claim that it's intention is to keep the cost of a PM donation down, however it will have the effect of either keeping it down or delaying an increase even if that was not the intent.

 

I would think your stated reason would support this decision.

 

As to the ad placement, it is placed where you will se it. Putting it somewhere out of sight makes no sense.

 

Relevance is something Yahoo and those placing the ads will have to determine. If the ads are not producing, they will either be changed or fine-tuned to be more relevant, however as much as people complain about these ads, they work. Supply and demand at it's finest.

 

If you don't like them, ignore them or use one of the many programs designed to block them. If they are truly offensive or inappropriate (Porn, etc.), report it to contact@geocaching.com or better yet, Yahoo.

Link to comment

And please, in rationalizing the change, please don't try and sell it to me as if you're doing me a favor. When you write "we are also trying to increase the relevancy of the ads so that they actually provide a benefit to our members," you're acting really quite condescending to your patrons. <snip>

 

Gotta disagree. Money for new projects, new servers, mroe bandwidth, development of things like Wherigo, etc. need funding. As others have said, look at the minimal amount of money Groundspeak charges for thier services (and still provides for free as an option). We should consider ourselves lucky that they don't move to a "value-priced" model.

 

And I realize that not everyone can afford that. So, maybe it's time for a three-tiered membership. Or a simple, open ended "pay what you think it's worth" subscription option.

The honor system of "Pay what you think it's worth" won't work any better than "please trade fairly". Look at any cache that's been out for a while as an example. We (cachers) see this as a hobby, but they (Groundspeak) have to look at it like a business or it will go away.

 

My eye noticed it within seconds of going to my first cache page this evening.

For everybody who's said this. Just how much time did you actually lose here? I think objecting to the principle of advertising is what's happening here, not het actual implementation. If you accept the fact that some advertising does need to occur, then this implementation is extremely un-obtrusive.

 

Look at all the sites (pay or not) that subject you to pop-ups, redirects, ads in the middle of content and ads before you can even see content.

 

I have no problems with the advertising going on here. Sure, they could be more relevant, but that's why it's a test. Relevance keys off words and location which can be based on supllied or inferred information. If you IP Address is routed through a port/hub/exchange, etc. - this will affect the location ad served.

 

But, I go on........

 

In short - no complaint here.

Link to comment

Perhaps the main objection of those who don't like the ads is that once the camel gets his nose in the tent the rest of his body is sure to follow. The Yahoo! ads are relatively innocuous and easily ignored but once GC.com finds that users don't cancel their premium membership what will stop them from selling larger ad space or those irritating popups.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...