Jump to content

Disappointed in Groundspeak


Recommended Posts

I block all the game stuff, too. But it doesn't annoy me that people play them because I don't see them. I'm really astounded at the notion that people hate the fact that someone does something even though it doesn't affect them.

 

I never said that I'm annoyed that people play the games. I became annoyed at the games because of the spam. I then blocked it.

 

Notice the order implied above. ANNOYED BY X. THEN BLOCK.

Edited by Redfist
Link to comment
It is not unsolicited in the way defined in point #1. If Groundspeak were to implement this feature, none of you here would receive notices from me, as we're not Facebook friends (I can hear you all sighing in relief). It would only go to people who've alread allowed communication from me, thus it's not unsolicited.

...

Facebook posts are not in bulk in the way point #3 seems to define it. From what I know of the history of spam, automated messages are sent out to lists of random email addresses. Posting a message to a small set of friends doesn't fit that criteria in my mind.

 

You're forgetting that Spambook is not primarily a communications platform. Its primary function is as a "social networking" platform. Adding someone as "friend" therefore does not automatically mean "I want to receive everything this user sends out", or rather, it shouldn't. On a social network platform, communications is just an added function, and the list of "friends" serves as an address book for it. Sending a message out to everybody in your address book thus is an unsolicited, bulk message = spam.

Calling it Spambook sort of nullifies your opinion on the matter.

 

I'm not trying to pile on but seriously - take a step back and read what you just wrote.

 

Just because he has an opinion about spamming and Facebook that differs from yours doesn't make him wrong or irrelevant. That's an extremely divisive stance to take and only weakens your cause.

Link to comment

it can be a way to meet up with friends who are also caching,

One post of "Who else here is into Geocaching?" on my wall takes care of that.

 

it can be a way to meet new cachers in the area,

That's what events are for. Hunting through the profiles of strangers in my area looking for geocachers seems like a hard way to do it, assuming you can see their wall without being their friend in the first place.

 

it can be a way to connect with distant caching friends ("hey, I found that one last summer when I was there!")

If my distant friends are interested in my caching they can just look up my profile on geocaching.com.

 

I'd rather see a page on geocaching.com that shows all the logs of my friends in the same format as the /my page.

Link to comment

But Facebook posts do not follow any definition of spam.

 

It is not unsolicited in the way defined in point #1. If Groundspeak were to implement this feature, none of you here would receive notices from me, as we're not Facebook friends (I can hear you all sighing in relief). It would only go to people who've alread allowed communication from me, thus it's not unsolicited.

Just because you're friends with someone doesn't mean they can send you anything they want. In the Facebook world, people routinely block unsolicited messages sent to them by their friends (Farmville, Mafia Wars, etc). That kind of spam isn't why I signed up for an account.

Link to comment

The longer this thread goes on the more I think about ....

troll.jpg

I've been a paying member for five years. I've been a low volume user who has supported Groundspeak with my money, nonetheless. At this point I'm hoping for more features and have decided to hold off on renewing until they do so. To say I'm a troll is pretty far off the mark.

Link to comment

The longer this thread goes on the more I think about ....

troll.jpg

I've been a paying member for five years. I've been a low volume user who has supported Groundspeak with my money, nonetheless. At this point I'm hoping for more features and have decided to hold off on renewing until they do so. To say I'm a troll is pretty far off the mark.

I do think you're trawling for trouble now.

Link to comment

The longer this thread goes on the more I think about ....

troll.jpg

I've been a paying member for five years. I've been a low volume user who has supported Groundspeak with my money, nonetheless. At this point I'm hoping for more features and have decided to hold off on renewing until they do so. To say I'm a troll is pretty far off the mark.

I do think you're trawling for trouble now.

Because people can't maintain a civil conversation? Stifle the heretic with the differing opinion! Is that how it is around here? As long as people keep responding the conversation continues, but I'm not allowed to respond?

Link to comment

You start this thread lamenting that there is no app for your precious iPad. It is pointed out that the present app works on an iPad. You don't want to let go of $10 because there might, some day, in the future, be a iPad only app and your going to need to let go of another $10.

You lament that you can't spam all your friends from your iPad that you don't have a app for about that latest LPC you just found. Every suggestion and comment is rebuffed and you again go back to beating the poor horse about no iPad app or no facebook integration. Troll seems appropriate.

Link to comment

 

I also have a much more mild concern about the negative impact that excessive cache posting on FB would have on geocaching's reputation. EVEN IF I choose not to spam my friends, other people may spam my friends. When I then rarely speak to my friends about geocaching, they may have a pre-conceived notion about it caused by the spamming done by some inconsiderate people who 'shared' every find on a power trail.

 

Good point. Do we really want geocaching to be the next Farmville?

Link to comment

I've been trying to not post here, but I can't help it. I don't have an iPhone or an iPad. I do have a smart phone running android. If the i products are anything like my 'droid, then it's just as quick and easy to share a link on FB without integration. Simply touch the screen where the URL is and hold for about 1 second. A menu pops up and the first item is "share page," click on that and one of the first options is Facebook. I've just shared with all my friends a page in less than 10 seconds WITHOUT Facebook integration on a smart device. Why do you need FB integration again?

Link to comment

I've been trying to not post here, but I can't help it. I don't have an iPhone or an iPad. I do have a smart phone running android. If the i products are anything like my 'droid, then it's just as quick and easy to share a link on FB without integration.

I don't think the iPhone can run more than one app at a time.

Link to comment

It seems people are speaking too emotionally about this.

 

Wow. Just.... wow.

 

Were you looking in a mirror when you wrote that?

I'll admit things were heated in the beginning, but I've been trying to be civil for a while now.

 

In his defense, he is one person defending against many. Tempers flare - no big deal.

 

 

Personally, I'm not against FB integration in a caching app. I'm against FB integration done hastily without forethought. I don't personally want to see a "simple checkbox" (where simple doesn't describe effort). I'd want to see thoughtful spam control built into the feature. My 2 cents...

Link to comment
It seems people are speaking too emotionally about this.
Wow. Just.... wow.Were you looking in a mirror when you wrote that?
I'll admit things were heated in the beginning, but I've been trying to be civil for a while now.

 

You have gotten progressivly worse and im surprised they have not banned you for insulting geocaching members.

Link to comment
Frankly, Facebook integration seems rather immaterial at your level of usage...it isn't exactly a lifechanger.

Geocaching itself is rather immaterial. Doesn't mean we can't suggest improvements.

 

Okay. How does this improve Geocaching?

All these people saying Facebook integration is harmful are just speculating. It's their opinion. Whereas I think implementing newer features is an improvement.

Some would disagree that implementing the beta maps for PQ preview is not in the improvement column. Some would disagree that the fixed width display, even if it improves IE, is not an improvement.

 

You want new features? How about a functional API? Been asking for that for years. How about a way to copy bookmarks? Been asking for that for years. How about getting the beta maps straighten out and with the functionality the old maps had? How about a nano size for a cache? that request has been around for a while now.

 

There are many feature requests that *improve* geocaching and geocaching.com that have been asked for and that we are still patiently waiting for. Having a facebook button does nothing to improve *geocaching* or the experience on this site. How about we get the lackeys to concentrate on providing the features that we have been asking for years instead of wasting time on facebook and twitter?

I'll vote for that!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment

I've been trying to not post here, but I can't help it. I don't have an iPhone or an iPad. I do have a smart phone running android. If the i products are anything like my 'droid, then it's just as quick and easy to share a link on FB without integration.

I don't think the iPhone can run more than one app at a time.

It's been able to run several apps at a time since the 3GS was released.

Link to comment

Good thing you people don't run the world or we'd all be suffering only what you want.

Kinda like you? "I don't get what I want - I quit." :anibad:

The OP never threatened to quit the game. He merely stated that he didn't intend to continue his Premium Membership. Personally, I wouldn't expect anyone to pay for a PM if it didn't include those features that were most important to the individual.

Link to comment

But Facebook posts do not follow any definition of spam.

 

It is not unsolicited in the way defined in point #1. If Groundspeak were to implement this feature, none of you here would receive notices from me, as we're not Facebook friends (I can hear you all sighing in relief). It would only go to people who've alread allowed communication from me, thus it's not unsolicited.

Just because you're friends with someone doesn't mean they can send you anything they want. In the Facebook world, people routinely block unsolicited messages sent to them by their friends (Farmville, Mafia Wars, etc). That kind of spam isn't why I signed up for an account.

I don't see how your complaint relates to features of this site. If someone on facebook keeps posting things that you don't want to see, block their posts or defriend them.

Link to comment

But Facebook posts do not follow any definition of spam.

 

It is not unsolicited in the way defined in point #1. If Groundspeak were to implement this feature, none of you here would receive notices from me, as we're not Facebook friends (I can hear you all sighing in relief). It would only go to people who've alread allowed communication from me, thus it's not unsolicited.

Just because you're friends with someone doesn't mean they can send you anything they want. In the Facebook world, people routinely block unsolicited messages sent to them by their friends (Farmville, Mafia Wars, etc). That kind of spam isn't why I signed up for an account.

I don't see how your complaint relates to features of this site. If someone on facebook keeps posting things that you don't want to see, block their posts or defriend them.

That's exactly what will happen to geocaching spam on Facebook. Nearly everyone will block it because they don't want status updates for every cache their friends find. What would the point of integration be then?

 

I might have wanted to try [some Facebook game] but because I received numerous (read: spam) messages about [that game] that I decided it wasn't worth my time. Perhaps someone might want to try geocaching but because they're friends with 5 people who each find 5 caches a day the 25 daily spam messages they got turned them off before they ever got started.

Link to comment

Good point. Do we really want geocaching to be the next Farmville?

You know back in the day before Facebook, people touted Geocaching as a way to get nerdy types out from behind the computer and outside into the streets and parks to find caches. Here was a game that took technology (both in the use of GPS and the internet) and encouraged people to get outside and exercise and sometimes even to physically interact with other people.

 

Now imagine the world of Facebook and smart mobile devices. You could have people using these to play Farmville or Mafia Wars, or you could use one of the apps that encourages people to checkin to real places like Foursquare or Gowalla. But what if you had something that got you to go to find containers hidden by other players using the GPS capability of your device, and let you interact with the the other players by sending messages about which caches you were heading to or what you had just found. It almost seems a perfect game to play with the new technology and one that will get people out of the house and interacting in person with others.

 

In fact, Groundspeak already provides some of these features. Those using the Groundspeak mobile apps (or who log field notes using TextMarks) can send Twitter messages when they are out caching. It seems Facebook could be added for those that use it instead of Twitter (or just use the Twitter app on Facebook to post your tweets).

 

The key is to make all of this social networking integration optional. Old timers (like me) are quite satisfied to use a traditional GPS device and take notes in the field when caching, the upload the field notes when we get home and log our finds. And we will generally have something to say about each cache and not post blank Found It logs. I suspect that this way of caching will always be supported. Those with smart phones on the other hand may wish to log the finds from the field. They may or may not care to share on Twitter or Facebook. I suspect they will have this option.

 

There is certainly a segment of the current Geocaching community who think the game has already gotten too big. They find the types of hides by people who have come to the game more recently lame. They find the type of logs people post lacking. These people may certainly worry that if geocaching were to become the next Farmville, it would mean more "lame" caches and more blank logs. They also may worry that it means more conflict between geocachers and the general public as more caches get hidden. I don't know how real these fears are. I only know that these fears are not new; there have been people complaining about the growth of geocaching since the very beginning.

Link to comment

Wow, I never knew there was a segment of the geopopulace who felt that it was getting too big. I'm sure Groundspeak would prefer it to grow, along with their revenues. And you need numbers for that to happen.

 

I imagine any implementation of Facebook integration would yield the following possible scenarios, people who see the caching posts of their friends would either:

 

Wonder what it's about, get interested, and start to cache for themselves.

Know about it and find it to be inconsequential.

Find the posts too mundane and/or annoying and block them.

Grow to despise the posts and not only block them but actively dislike geocaching as a result.

 

Now, thinking about it logically, there would probably be a bell curve of results. Some people would get turned on to caching, more would be indifferent, about the same amount would block the posts, and a few would be irritated.

 

What are the up and down sides? Well, obviously the upside would be more cachers getting turned on to the hobby. The largest portion of people (either indifferent or blockers) don't count, as they don't affect caching as a whole. And the segment that despises caching because of it - do they count for anything? They wouldn't sign up, anyway, right?

 

Basically, life is a huge swath of grey area. I feel one way, others feel differently. No one is absolutely correct, so for people to be hammering home their opinions as fact is disingenious, at best.

Link to comment
You have gotten progressivly worse and im surprised they have not banned you for insulting geocaching members.

I thought I was being more civil. I guess it's tough at the bottom of the dogpile. Please point out how I've deteriorated, though. I apologized earlier, what else shall I do?

For what its worth, I have noticed.

Link to comment

But Facebook posts do not follow any definition of spam.

 

It is not unsolicited in the way defined in point #1. If Groundspeak were to implement this feature, none of you here would receive notices from me, as we're not Facebook friends (I can hear you all sighing in relief). It would only go to people who've alread allowed communication from me, thus it's not unsolicited.

Just because you're friends with someone doesn't mean they can send you anything they want. In the Facebook world, people routinely block unsolicited messages sent to them by their friends (Farmville, Mafia Wars, etc). That kind of spam isn't why I signed up for an account.

I don't see how your complaint relates to features of this site. If someone on facebook keeps posting things that you don't want to see, block their posts or defriend them.

 

Actually, I have a couple of "friends" on Facebook that I retain because it seems that they use every Farmville, Mafia Wars, social media game that comes out. Keeping them as friends makes it much easier to discover which apps I want to block.

Link to comment

...

Basically, life is a huge swath of grey area. I feel one way, others feel differently. No one is absolutely correct, so for people to be hammering home their opinions as fact is disingenious, at best.

 

I see life as definite Blacks and Whites - no grey. Maybe an outside observer standing a long way back blends them into grey but I prefer a well defined Black and White. Right and Wrong. Yes and No, True or False, Ones and Zeros.

Link to comment

But Facebook posts do not follow any definition of spam.

 

It is not unsolicited in the way defined in point #1. If Groundspeak were to implement this feature, none of you here would receive notices from me, as we're not Facebook friends (I can hear you all sighing in relief). It would only go to people who've alread allowed communication from me, thus it's not unsolicited.

Just because you're friends with someone doesn't mean they can send you anything they want. In the Facebook world, people routinely block unsolicited messages sent to them by their friends (Farmville, Mafia Wars, etc). That kind of spam isn't why I signed up for an account.

I don't see how your complaint relates to features of this site. If someone on facebook keeps posting things that you don't want to see, block their posts or defriend them.

That's exactly what will happen to geocaching spam on Facebook. Nearly everyone will block it because they don't want status updates for every cache their friends find. What would the point of integration be then?

 

I might have wanted to try [some Facebook game] but because I received numerous (read: spam) messages about [that game] that I decided it wasn't worth my time. Perhaps someone might want to try geocaching but because they're friends with 5 people who each find 5 caches a day the 25 daily spam messages they got turned them off before they ever got started.

On the other hand, lots of people do play [some facebook game]. Apparently, lots of people must disagree with your reasoning.
Link to comment

I imagine any implementation of Facebook integration would yield the following possible scenarios, people who see the caching posts of their friends would either:

 

Wonder what it's about, get interested, and start to cache for themselves.

Know about it and find it to be inconsequential.

Find the posts too mundane and/or annoying and block them.

Grow to despise the posts and not only block them but actively dislike geocaching as a result.

I believe the last one vastly outweighs the first one. I already do the first one by posting photos of the cool spots I've been caching to on FB. Even if my friends don't care about geocaching, they're not going to complain that I'm posting nice pictures.

 

I actually had a friend who announced all his cache finds (can't remember if it was on Twitter or FB) and it got annoying really quickly. Fortunately he saw the light, or someone had a few words with him, and he stopped doing it.

Edited by Avernar
Link to comment

I've been trying to not post here, but I can't help it. I don't have an iPhone or an iPad. I do have a smart phone running android.

 

I *do* have an iPhone and although I don't own an iPad (I can't believe that the Riffster has one and I don't) I have used one and loaded up the GS app on it and it worked we'll. The OP argues that running the iOS app on an iPad doesn't take advantage of the larger screen real estate and other features available on the iPad. If GS is going to produce a version of the Geocaching app optimized for the iPad, why not develop one for tablets like the Samsung Galaxy, Motorola Xoom, Blackberry Playbook, or one of the 40 something other tablet devices on the market (most of which are Droid based)? The answer is simple. Groundspeak has a finite amount of developer resources, thus it prioritize projects and allocates programmer resources to those that will give the most bang for the buck. Finalizing a public API might be one of the best examples (that others have mentioned in this thread) as it could conceivably allow third party developers to write tablet based applications that are usable by geocachers that might prefer an alternative to the Apple kool-aid.

 

As a software developer that has written a few enterprise scale applications I am aware of the hardware/OS dependencies that sometimes have to be dealt with. At some point one has to balance how much development effort something is going to take to address an issue that only benefits a fraction of a percent of the total number of users, especially when there is a viable work around.

Link to comment

I've been trying to not post here, but I can't help it. I don't have an iPhone or an iPad. I do have a smart phone running android.

 

I *do* have an iPhone and although I don't own an iPad (I can't believe that the Riffster has one and I don't) I have used one and loaded up the GS app on it and it worked we'll. The OP argues that running the iOS app on an iPad doesn't take advantage of the larger screen real estate and other features available on the iPad. If GS is going to produce a version of the Geocaching app optimized for the iPad, why not develop one for tablets like the Samsung Galaxy, Motorola Xoom, Blackberry Playbook, or one of the 40 something other tablet devices on the market (most of which are Droid based)? The answer is simple. Groundspeak has a finite amount of developer resources, thus it prioritize projects and allocates programmer resources to those that will give the most bang for the buck. Finalizing a public API might be one of the best examples (that others have mentioned in this thread) as it could conceivably allow third party developers to write tablet based applications that are usable by geocachers that might prefer an alternative to the Apple kool-aid.

 

As a software developer that has written a few enterprise scale applications I am aware of the hardware/OS dependencies that sometimes have to be dealt with. At some point one has to balance how much development effort something is going to take to address an issue that only benefits a fraction of a percent of the total number of users, especially when there is a viable work around.

This post is a bit inaccurate. Who cares that there are 40 variants of Android tablets. It's not like Groundspeak has to write 40 different versions of their app. Just one. And if they make their Apple version universal, that's two. I don't know if Android phone and tablet OSes are universal, so maybe three. Oh, and do they make Windows 7 versions?

 

And in case the kool-aid comment was an attempt at a slam, I don't drink it either. The iPad is my only Apple device and I really dislike their walled garden.

Link to comment

I've been trying to not post here, but I can't help it. I don't have an iPhone or an iPad. I do have a smart phone running android.

 

I *do* have an iPhone and although I don't own an iPad (I can't believe that the Riffster has one and I don't) I have used one and loaded up the GS app on it and it worked we'll. The OP argues that running the iOS app on an iPad doesn't take advantage of the larger screen real estate and other features available on the iPad. If GS is going to produce a version of the Geocaching app optimized for the iPad, why not develop one for tablets like the Samsung Galaxy, Motorola Xoom, Blackberry Playbook, or one of the 40 something other tablet devices on the market (most of which are Droid based)? The answer is simple. Groundspeak has a finite amount of developer resources, thus it prioritize projects and allocates programmer resources to those that will give the most bang for the buck. Finalizing a public API might be one of the best examples (that others have mentioned in this thread) as it could conceivably allow third party developers to write tablet based applications that are usable by geocachers that might prefer an alternative to the Apple kool-aid.

 

As a software developer that has written a few enterprise scale applications I am aware of the hardware/OS dependencies that sometimes have to be dealt with. At some point one has to balance how much development effort something is going to take to address an issue that only benefits a fraction of a percent of the total number of users, especially when there is a viable work around.

 

The point of my post was to show a quick, easy viable work around. I would rather see the dev. team work on something that benefits the whole group.

 

If the i products are anything like my 'droid, then it's just as quick and easy to share a link on FB without integration. Simply touch the screen where the URL is and hold for about 1 second. A menu pops up and the first item is "share page," click on that and one of the first options is Facebook. I've just shared with all my friends a page in less than 10 seconds WITHOUT Facebook integration
Link to comment
(I can't believe that the Riffster has one and I don't)

A bit of an explanation is in order;

I wanted a device to store and read literature. I've been getting pestered by my family because of my burgeoning book collection, (Sci Fi/Fantasy, mostly), so I decided to thin it out some, dividing my books into those which I'll likely not read again, about 800 or so, and those which I will read again, at most, a couple hundred. Since our house is small, I thought 'If I get all these keepers as ebooks, that'll save me a ton of space', which started the debate about which ebook reader to get. My choices were a Kindle, a Nook or an iPad. All the pixie dust on the iPad, combined with the fact that I could read books from all three formats on it, steered me toward that particular device.

 

In retrospect, I think a Kindle would have served me a lot better, as my biggest complaint when reading is that the battery lasts only about 12 hours continuously. There are a few things that the iPad does well, but I would probably not buy it again if I had it to do over.

 

Back to your regularly scheduled topic!

Link to comment

I've been trying to not post here, but I can't help it. I don't have an iPhone or an iPad. I do have a smart phone running android.

 

I *do* have an iPhone and although I don't own an iPad (I can't believe that the Riffster has one and I don't) I have used one and loaded up the GS app on it and it worked we'll. The OP argues that running the iOS app on an iPad doesn't take advantage of the larger screen real estate and other features available on the iPad. If GS is going to produce a version of the Geocaching app optimized for the iPad, why not develop one for tablets like the Samsung Galaxy, Motorola Xoom, Blackberry Playbook, or one of the 40 something other tablet devices on the market (most of which are Droid based)? The answer is simple. Groundspeak has a finite amount of developer resources, thus it prioritize projects and allocates programmer resources to those that will give the most bang for the buck. Finalizing a public API might be one of the best examples (that others have mentioned in this thread) as it could conceivably allow third party developers to write tablet based applications that are usable by geocachers that might prefer an alternative to the Apple kool-aid.

 

As a software developer that has written a few enterprise scale applications I am aware of the hardware/OS dependencies that sometimes have to be dealt with. At some point one has to balance how much development effort something is going to take to address an issue that only benefits a fraction of a percent of the total number of users, especially when there is a viable work around.

This post is a bit inaccurate. Who cares that there are 40 variants of Android tablets. It's not like Groundspeak has to write 40 different versions of their app. Just one. And if they make their Apple version universal, that's two. I don't know if Android phone and tablet OSes are universal, so maybe three. Oh, and do they make Windows 7 versions?

 

I didn't say that were 40 variants of the Android tablets (though it *is* the most common O/S). I actually do a bit of work with mobile technologies, and in fact, one of my official responsibilities is to evaluate emerging technologies and specifically the role of mobile devices and tablets will play in the future in the enterprise in which I work. From my research I have identified 40 something different tablet models. Only one of them runs iOS (Apple). HP and Research in Motion (Blackberry) run their own proprietary Operating System (Web-OS and Blackberry Tablet O/S). There are a few different tablets running Windows 7 and the majority of tablets are running some version of Android. If Groundspeak were to develop only one version of their app for tablet PCs it would probably make more sense to develop one for Android based devices.

 

Even if every tablet on the market ran the same O/S the number of geocachers that use tablets for geocaching is probably a small fraction of 1%, and with a finite amount of developer resources it just doesn't make any sense to allocate resources for a project that only benefits an extremely small number of it's users, when there are plenty of other projects that need development time.

 

And in case the kool-aid comment was an attempt at a slam, I don't drink it either. The iPad is my only Apple device and I really dislike their walled garden.

 

It wasn't intended as a slam. There are quite a few people that think Apple can do know wrong but there is certainly a growing number of people that recognize that there are some viable alternatives, and as a commercial enterprise Groundspeak is likely watching trends in market share before committing resources to new software development. In Q3 of 2010 the iPad held 96% of the market share for tablet devices. In Q4 that dropped to 75%. During the same period Android based devices when from 2.3% to 22%. If GS chooses to develop a tablet based version of the application it might actually make more sense to develop for Android based devices before working on an iPad version.

Link to comment

If GS is going to produce a version of the Geocaching app optimized for the iPad, why not develop one for tablets like the Samsung Galaxy, Motorola Xoom, Blackberry Playbook, or one of the 40 something other tablet devices on the market (most of which are Droid based)?

Because porting from iPhone to iPad is way easier than porting to a completely different platform.

Link to comment
If GS chooses to develop a tablet based version of the application it might actually make more sense to develop for Android based devices before working on an iPad version.

I don't follow why it makes sense to target 22% of the market vs. 75%. And remember, this is coming from a non-Apple fanboi.

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...