Jump to content

SUBMITTED (24896) - [FEATURE] Request for Private Profile Page


melissalep
Followers 6

Recommended Posts

I use my geocaching profile page (which contains links to the lists of all geocaches and trackable items I've logged along with dates) for my own benefit of keeping up with all of my geocaching activity, but not as a social network. I don't like the idea of others having such access to all the activity posted on my geocaching profile. Could a privacy setting could be created that would limit access of the information on our profiles to only the people on our friends list? Thank you very much.

Link to comment

I use my geocaching profile page (which contains links to the lists of all geocaches and trackable items I've logged along with dates) for my own benefit of keeping up with all of my geocaching activity, but not as a social network. I don't like the idea of others having such access to all the activity posted on my geocaching profile. Could a privacy setting could be created that would limit access of the information on our profiles to only the people on our friends list? Thank you very much.

 

YOU, yourself - are the privacy setting! If you don't want people knowing every detail of your day, don't write detailed logs. If you don't want people knowing where you went, log your finds out of order. If you don't want people seeing what caches you've found, log finds as notes. And most importantly, if you REALLY don't want people seeing what your doing, don't log caches online! No one forces you too and many people don't. By simply being on the internet, you are giving up a part of your privacy. Hundreds of websites RIGHT now have cookies (little scripts) installed on your computer that can and will track you and watch what you visit and do online.

 

IMO, asking for a privacy setting to be implemented is just laziness. Privacy starts with the individual first.

Link to comment

I use my geocaching profile page (which contains links to the lists of all geocaches and trackable items I've logged along with dates) for my own benefit of keeping up with all of my geocaching activity, but not as a social network. I don't like the idea of others having such access to all the activity posted on my geocaching profile. Could a privacy setting could be created that would limit access of the information on our profiles to only the people on our friends list? Thank you very much.

If your going to trust Groundspeak to manage security you are smoking some really good stuff. How many times has farcebook blown the security for their users? More than once? Its been said before and it will be said again, if you don't want folks looking at your found caches and trackables don't log them on the site, keep that information in an excel or word document on your computer. If you want to share with your friends, email them updates.

Link to comment

I have been thinking about this... perhaps what's needed is a separate stats page. For distribution, you could select placing a link to it on your PUBLIC PROFILE, or not... and it would always be available on your private profile/account details page for you.

For friends you could just send out the URL to the ones you wanted to see it. That would be the same as photos in a hosting service, in a private album, but for which you can distribute as you wish to individuals. Wouldn't be too hard to do that way, not much extra space and a simple linking process for one page. Gives privacy control to the account owner, and it would cut down on the amount of stuff that comes up on some accounts... I'm not overly fond of having all that much in a public profile when you are just scanning.

 

That said, look at all the people with virtually nothing in their public profiles... account name and a message link(anonymous if desired). These days you don't even have rough location or any descriptors at all, much of the time.

 

Just a thought.

 

Doug 7rxc

Link to comment

lets see now for some constructive criticism

 

1. you have the option to hide your stats

 

2. don't put anything in your profile, instead create your own website (its not as brain surgery as it used to be) or make a Facebook account and restrict the access to your friends

 

the majority enjoy sharing their achievements with others and the majority enjoy reading other people's achievements

 

its been asked before and no one yet has provided a logical answer: How does it affect your privacy if someone knows where you have been?

Link to comment

What I'd like to see is the option to make the found count not clickable.

 

Now people can click on a cacher's profile and see an organized list of every successful cache visit she's recorded on the site all on one easy-to-navigate page.

 

6251883779_99d7d2c783.jpg

 

P.S. This would not affect the logs on a cache, the cache owner and anyone who visits that cache page can read it.

Link to comment

What I'd like to see is the option to make the found count not clickable.

 

Now people can click on a cacher's profile and see an organized list of every successful cache visit she's recorded on the site all on one easy-to-navigate page.

 

6251883779_99d7d2c783.jpg

 

P.S. This would not affect the logs on a cache, the cache owner and anyone who visits that cache page can read it.

My personal opinion is that if someone expects a website to provide security they will have at least one if not regular disappointments. This has been proven many times. Since I can't track you in real time by looking at your finds, the only reason I can imagine to hide this information is because you don't want me to discover you really don't find the caches you log, or at least you don't sign the logs.

Link to comment

What I'd like to see is the option to make the found count not clickable.

 

Now people can click on a cacher's profile and see an organized list of every successful cache visit she's recorded on the site all on one easy-to-navigate page.

 

6251883779_99d7d2c783.jpg

 

P.S. This would not affect the logs on a cache, the cache owner and anyone who visits that cache page can read it.

My personal opinion is that if someone expects a website to provide security they will have at least one if not regular disappointments. This has been proven many times. Since I can't track you in real time by looking at your finds, the only reason I can imagine to hide this information is because you don't want me to discover you really don't find the caches you log, or at least you don't sign the logs.

 

It's not so much security. I know there are ways to find information and get around security features for the determined person but it's that geocaching.com just hands it to anyone on a silver platter.

Link to comment

Since I can't track you in real time by looking at your finds, the only reason I can imagine to hide this information is because you don't want me to discover you really don't find the caches you log, or at least you don't sign the logs.

 

You would be incorrect.

 

But I've given up supporting this feature request. I'll for them fixing the problem with the API not respecting the ignore list. <_<

Link to comment

What I'd like to see is the option to make the found count not clickable.

 

Now people can click on a cacher's profile and see an organized list of every successful cache visit she's recorded on the site all on one easy-to-navigate page.

 

6251883779_99d7d2c783.jpg

 

P.S. This would not affect the logs on a cache, the cache owner and anyone who visits that cache page can read it.

My personal opinion is that if someone expects a website to provide security they will have at least one if not regular disappointments. This has been proven many times. Since I can't track you in real time by looking at your finds, the only reason I can imagine to hide this information is because you don't want me to discover you really don't find the caches you log, or at least you don't sign the logs.

 

It's not so much security. I know there are ways to find information and get around security features for the determined person but it's that geocaching.com just hands it to anyone on a silver platter.

 

it is your PAST, why does it matter? :unsure:

Link to comment

What I'd like to see is the option to make the found count not clickable.

 

Now people can click on a cacher's profile and see an organized list of every successful cache visit she's recorded on the site all on one easy-to-navigate page.

 

6251883779_99d7d2c783.jpg

 

P.S. This would not affect the logs on a cache, the cache owner and anyone who visits that cache page can read it.

My personal opinion is that if someone expects a website to provide security they will have at least one if not regular disappointments. This has been proven many times. Since I can't track you in real time by looking at your finds, the only reason I can imagine to hide this information is because you don't want me to discover you really don't find the caches you log, or at least you don't sign the logs.

 

It's not so much security. I know there are ways to find information and get around security features for the determined person but it's that geocaching.com just hands it to anyone on a silver platter.

 

it is your PAST, why does it matter? :unsure:

What he said.

Link to comment

 

it is your PAST, why does it matter? :unsure:

 

That's what I thought. :unsure:

 

The only log type which I consider to be a potential security problem is the 'Will Attend' on Events as they are telling everyone (who can be bothered to look) that you will be away from home on that day/time.

 

Even then, you can only find someone's Will Attend logs by reading searching through Event pages - ie. not from someone's profile...

 

 

Mark

Link to comment

The only log type which I consider to be a potential security problem is the 'Will Attend' on Events as they are telling everyone (who can be bothered to look) that you will be away from home on that day/time.

 

Even then, you can only find someone's Will Attend logs by reading searching through Event pages - ie. not from someone's profile...

 

Mark

And even then, wouldn't it be a rather dangerous assumption to think that NO ONE will be left at home when I'm off at that event? Like my older brother the ex-con or the really, really large protective dog I left at home?

 

Not that I necessarily have either, but how would that hypothetical bad-guy-who-haunts-the-geocaching-web-site-looking-for-potential-victims know that?

 

--Larry

Link to comment

What I'd like to see is the option to make the found count not clickable.

 

Now people can click on a cacher's profile and see an organized list of every successful cache visit she's recorded on the site all on one easy-to-navigate page.

 

6251883779_99d7d2c783.jpg

 

P.S. This would not affect the logs on a cache, the cache owner and anyone who visits that cache page can read it.

 

Yes, this is exactly what I mean. Thank you!!

Link to comment

We currently have a request in our database to limit access to an account's profile to only that account's friends.

 

I hope that will be an 'opt in' option and that most cachers won't block their profiles

 

The more people shut themselves away in a clique of friends, the more the 'community' aspect of the hobby will disappear.

This can already be seen at Events where cachers only talk to cachers they already know :(

 

Mark

Link to comment

We currently have a request in our database to limit access to an account's profile to only that account's friends.

 

I hope that will be an 'opt in' option and that most cachers won't block their profiles

 

The more people shut themselves away in a clique of friends, the more the 'community' aspect of the hobby will disappear.

This can already be seen at Events where cachers only talk to cachers they already know :(

 

Mark

 

To be clear, just because we enter something in our database doesn't mean that it is planned for implementation. It only means that we've seen enough support for something to take discussion about it to the next level.

Link to comment

I presume you would want your logs hidden in Cache Listings and PQ's too.

 

I haven't read any requests for hiding online comments in cache listings or pq's. Those are part of the cache history and required when hunting for caches.

It's about the easy access to our previous whereabouts in an orderly, chronological, and quick one-click manner that is being discussed here. Having an orderly list of all the places Melissa has cached in isn't necessary for our enjoyment of the game. Seeing her comment in a specific cache listing about a flooded trail or the coordinates being off by 30 feet is important to the community and the history of the cache.

Edited by Lone R
Link to comment

It's about the easy access to our previous whereabouts of a cacher in an orderly, chronological, and quick one-click manner that is what the is being discussed. Having an orderly list of all the places Melissa has cached in isn't necessary for our enjoyment of the game.

Looked up Melissa's cache history. Followed her path exactly. Surprise, surprise. I didn't run into Melissa. I did have fun finding all the caches she's been at.

 

All joking aside, there are much easier ways of finding someone than with a list of where they have been. You're more likely to find them at a cache they DNFed as they are likely to return there and those are not listed in their profile.

Link to comment
To be clear, just because we enter something in our database doesn't mean that it is planned for implementation.

How true... :blink:

 

Groundspeak wants to hear from our users about how to better your experiences on Geocaching.com. Comments such as these, however, are outside of the realm of constructive criticism. We aim to listen more closely and to serve this community as best as we can, but the comment posted by Moun10Bike is to reiterate that we cannot do everything that is requested. Please be respectful in these threads.

Link to comment

Add me to the list of cachers who would prefer not to see this feature, or if the feature is implemented make it an opt-in feature.

 

I appreciate the social aspect of geocaching (not to be confused with "social network"). What I mean, is that I like to see the other stories that people are saying and yes, when I see an interesting log I will follow through to that player's profile page and see what else they have written.

 

I also use player profiles to sort out which caches I would like to visit. There are some cachers who prefer similar caches to the type of caching I enjoy. Some of them I respect, and they don't always respect me back. Anyhow, looking at the caches they have found recently, and their logs helps me to locate potentially enjoyable caches that simply would not be possible if all cachers profiles suddenly became private or hidden. If I had to add everyone to a "friends list" to view their profile this would be impossible, particularly for that "doesn't respect me back" group.

 

Truth be told, if the semi-social aspect of this game was removed and I could no longer see familiar names on familiar caches then follow through to the profiles to share stories and maybe come up with ideas for new adventures, it would be time for me to find a new hobby as I'm not really interested in caching as a lone experience with a website. I can do that with a PlayStation, or XBox. There is more to the game than solo-cache hunts and more interesting stories than event caches.

 

The filtering tools on the site - micro, regular, difficulty ,terrain, attributes fail miserably to express the value of a particular cache vs a glowing log entry from someone I respect. I'm not going to "happen upon" a gem of a cache with private profiles, unless I already know about that gem of a cache in the first place. With 20,000+ caches in my Province I am sure not going to look at them individually.

Link to comment

Groundspeak wants to hear from our users about how to better your experiences on Geocaching.com. Comments such as these, however, are outside of the realm of constructive criticism.

It wasn't personal, it wasn't rude, it WAS factual.

We aim to listen more closely and to serve this community as best as we can, but the comment posted by Moun10Bike is to reiterate that we cannot do everything that is requested.

Excuse me ?

Top 5 requests from the Feedback site.

Solve a Mystery, Under Review.

Nano cache size, Planned. We've been asking for EIGHT YEARS....

Support Wherigo, Planned. Last update was in 2010 for the unsupported WinMo.

New cacher Guidelines, Under Review.

3rd Party API, still waiting.

 

Please be respectful in these threads.

Making empty promises isn't respectful.

Link to comment

Add me to the list of cachers who would prefer not to see this feature, or if the feature is implemented make it an opt-in feature.

 

Yes, I too would prefer an opt-in feature.

I vote a resounding NO, simply because there are a whole lot of other issues (call them bugs if you wish) that they need to deal with before even thinking about this sort of major change. It's also my feeling (and no, I don't have statistical proof) that even an opt-in feature would be used only by a small minority of geocachers.

 

I was never promised a whole lot of privacy when I signed up with the Web site, and I don't expect the Web site to provide it. Nor do I feel there's a need. If there's something I don't wish to make public, I don't post it on the InterWebs.

 

Facebook, everybody's favorite social networking site, with its gazillion dollar budget and literally hundreds of programmers, has never been able to properly protect member privacy. Why anyone would think that Groundspeak, with its hugely smaller budget and small cadre of coders, could do what Facebook hasn't been able to do is beyond me. I would rather go with an open Web site (one where everyone knows it's open) than a Web site that makes privacy promises it will never be able to keep.

 

--Larry

Edited by larryc43230
Link to comment

Groundspeak wants to hear from our users about how to better your experiences on Geocaching.com. Comments such as these, however, are outside of the realm of constructive criticism.

It wasn't personal, it wasn't rude, it WAS factual.

Editorialising is not fact reporting.

 

We aim to listen more closely and to serve this community as best as we can, but the comment posted by Moun10Bike is to reiterate that we cannot do everything that is requested.

 

Excuse me?

 

Top 5 requests from the Feedback site.

 

Solve a Mystery, Under Review.

Phase one is implemented, and Phase 2 is coming.

 

Nano cache size, Planned. We've been asking for EIGHT YEARS....

Is coming in the early new year with the other GPX enhancements. Further, this was a philosophical decision. Nanos were not as prevalent in the game eight years ago, so claiming that this has been pressing for all that time is not accurate.

Support Wherigo, Planned. Last update was in 2010 for the unsupported WinMo.

It is planned, but this is not a quick implementation - and don't be cheeky about that statement.

 

New cacher Guidelines, Under Review.

We are still reviewing this and working on the best way to implement. You will see more on this in January.

3rd Party API, still waiting.

It is highly unlikely that the 3rd party API as you describe it will be implemented. We are not an open source project.

Please be respectful in these threads.

Making empty promises isn't respectful.

Agreed. And we are doing much better at not promising what we cannot deliver. This is exactly why some things will be declined.

You, however, are not being respectful.

Link to comment

 

You, however, are not being respectful.

 

No explanation needed,Sandy. As pointed out in another thread, this is not a democracy, it is a business that makes decisions accordingly.

 

Back OT, I would be very disappointed were this to be implemented. Frist, there are no privacy concerns with the current information provided. It is historical and of no use to someone wanting to "Stalk".

 

Second, there are many cachers, at least in our area, who plan monthly or weekly cache runs. Occasionally a log will get posted on a cache like;

 

"This was our 57th cache on a 70 cache day. We managed to hit many of the "hidden" historical sites in the area as well as some great trails."

 

With the current system, I can click on the users and look at the caches they found that day and plan the route accordingly. Nice little feature. Absolutely needed? No. Extremely useful, especially when going to an unfamiliar area? Without a doubt.

Link to comment

I do not want to see this implemented, as well. It would change so many things about caching that I've taken for granted for almost 10 years. I think that there are many ways that this could backlash. One of the unexpected things about caching when I started was how social it could be. This is a good thing. People can have as much personal stuff as they want, or as little as they want, already. I love looking through people's pictures, I love seeing where they've been and what they are doing. This isn't stalkerish, but a love of travel and people. Geocaching makes me feel part of a bigger whole, namely the world. This would handicap geocaching, in my opinion.

Link to comment

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if you don't want me seeing your logs, pictures, etc, just don't post them. If you want to send your friends a summary of your activities you can do it without the use of this website. If you don't want me seeing the list of the caches you logged, put them on your ignore list then I can't see the list. Of course you don't get to see your find counts and spiffy stats, but that is the price you pay for secrecy. Not saying anything bad, or trying to imply anything about Groundspeak, but it is to easy for Groundspeak to make a programming error that exposes everything while folks think they are protected. Groundspeak just doesn't need that liability. I'm pretty sure the folks that are asking for the private pages have no idea of the risks and exposures that such a thing can entail. Anything posted on the internet is available to determined people and the history is forever. If you want secrecy, don't post it on the internet.

Edited by jholly
Link to comment

Just showing how easy it is to grab the info; it's not just a case of hiding the Profile page...

And for people using the likes of GSAK et al, still available even if GS block it on the Site...

 

other caches hidden or found by this user

Follow the link off any cache page...

 

http://www.geocachin...x?ul=melissalep

Guess I'll be the first to ask: What are you trying to say here? Personally, I like the fact that this information is available. Are you objecting to it, or supporting it?

 

--Larry

For the record. I'm against it... :huh:

Link to comment

Just showing how easy it is to grab the info; it's not just a case of hiding the Profile page...

And for people using the likes of GSAK et al, still available even if GS block it on the Site...

 

other caches hidden or found by this user

Follow the link off any cache page...

 

http://www.geocachin...x?ul=melissalep

Guess I'll be the first to ask: What are you trying to say here? Personally, I like the fact that this information is available. Are you objecting to it, or supporting it?

 

--Larry

For the record. I'm against it... :huh:

I have to disagree with you on this for a number of reasons. Here's just one:

 

I own five caches, and if someone logs a DNF on one of them, this information can come in handy when I'm deciding whether the cache needs a maintenance visit. Getting at least a vague (and admittedly imperfect) notion of the cacher who logged the DNF is information I can use in making this decision. I suppose it's related to the tried-and-true notion that it's of value to consider the source. Newbie? Pro-level cacher (whatever that means)? It's simply data I can use to help me make decisions.

 

Since no one has convinced me that it does any harm to keep this information available, and since I'm wary of how much tinkering with the Web site it would take to implement this sort of change, I will continue to argue against this request unless convinced otherwise.

 

--Larry

Link to comment

i just came across this article, it should put to rest the subject

 

Internet Privacy

 

The legal definition of privacy in the United States constitutes the information that one intends to keep private. All other information given out, whether intentionally or not, is public domain. While this may not be the social view on privacy, this means that everything we do on the Internet is available to the public.

 

We can protect ourselves from this ongoing war on our privacy by keeping our intimate knowledge close to home and not relying on the goodness of others or the watchfulness of the government; unless, of course, you like living your life in the public eye.
Link to comment

I use my geocaching profile page (which contains links to the lists of all geocaches and trackable items I've logged along with dates) for my own benefit of keeping up with all of my geocaching activity, ...

 

Hi melissalep,

 

our profiles on GC.com are very aptly called "Your Public Profile", so I agree that you shouldn't put private data there. If I were you I'd put the private profile somewhere safe - e.g. your local computer - and just put a link on the profile. This link would be of no use for anyone else but you, but you'd have you private data handy.

 

Kind regards

Jens

Link to comment

i just came across this article, it should put to rest the subject

 

Internet Privacy

 

The legal definition of privacy in the United States constitutes the information that one intends to keep private. All other information given out, whether intentionally or not, is public domain. While this may not be the social view on privacy, this means that everything we do on the Internet is available to the public.

 

 

Does this mean that my Gmail email messages are available for anyone else who has a Google account? Or anyone who uses the internet?

Link to comment

Just thought of something fairly easy that GS could implement. Allow us to see who visited our profile. It would be just like PM caches where the CO gets an auditted list of who visited the cache listing.

 

Objections? Would the viewer object to his privacy being violated when he checks Melissa's profile?

Link to comment

i just came across this article, it should put to rest the subject

 

Internet Privacy

 

The legal definition of privacy in the United States constitutes the information that one intends to keep private. All other information given out, whether intentionally or not, is public domain. While this may not be the social view on privacy, this means that everything we do on the Internet is available to the public.

 

 

Does this mean that my Gmail email messages are available for anyone else who has a Google account? Or anyone who uses the internet?

 

you're missing the point completely

Link to comment

 

Does this mean that my Gmail email messages are available for anyone else who has a Google account? Or anyone who uses the internet?

 

According to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, no, they are only protected by "contractual promise", not law.

 

As explained by Chairman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation Brad Templeton, speaking specifically about GMail;

 

"ECPA

 

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act started out in the 80s as a blessing. It declared that e-mail was a private means of communication, and that we might hope for the same level of privacy in it as we have in phone calls and letters. Among other things, it means that police need a wiretap warrant to read your e-mails, and that your e-mail company's employees can't disclose your e-mails to others.

 

But the world has changed and the ECPA has not changed with it. E-mail in transit is protected, but those in law enforcement advocate that once mail is processed and stored, it is no longer the same private letter, but simply a database service.

 

GMail's big selling point is that they don't simply deliver your mail. They store it for you, and they index it so you can search it. (Of particular importance, you authorize them to scan your mail for these purposes, and that authorization is the act that risks stripping you of your rights.) All the other webmail companies who don't already do this will, I'm sure, quickly have offerings to compete with GMail. As noted, not only do they search it, but they scan on viewing to provide ads that match the content, making it not just a database but a shopping service. Should you click on those ads, the merchants will see your IP address, and know somebody from that address (or with their cookie) was reading a page, search result or e-mail related to their ads.

 

Unfortunately, a database and shopping service doesn't look as much like an e-mail delivery service as it should according to the legal definitions in the ECPA. Thus, while Google promises not to peek into your e-mails or hand them to others, the danger is that this is now solely their contractual promise. With an e-mail delivery service covered by the ECPA, the law, not just Google's terms of service governs when your mail can be handed over, particularly to law enforcement."

Edited by baloo&bd
Link to comment

 

Does this mean that my Gmail email messages are available for anyone else who has a Google account? Or anyone who uses the internet?

 

According to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, no, they are only protected by "contractual promise", not law.

 

As explained by Chairman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation Brad Templeton, speaking specifically about GMail;

 

"ECPA

 

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act started out in the 80s as a blessing. It declared that e-mail was a private means of communication, and that we might hope for the same level of privacy in it as we have in phone calls and letters. Among other things, it means that police need a wiretap warrant to read your e-mails, and that your e-mail company's employees can't disclose your e-mails to others.

 

But the world has changed and the ECPA has not changed with it. E-mail in transit is protected, but those in law enforcement advocate that once mail is processed and stored, it is no longer the same private letter, but simply a database service.

 

GMail's big selling point is that they don't simply deliver your mail. They store it for you, and they index it so you can search it. (Of particular importance, you authorize them to scan your mail for these purposes, and that authorization is the act that risks stripping you of your rights.) All the other webmail companies who don't already do this will, I'm sure, quickly have offerings to compete with GMail. As noted, not only do they search it, but they scan on viewing to provide ads that match the content, making it not just a database but a shopping service. Should you click on those ads, the merchants will see your IP address, and know somebody from that address (or with their cookie) was reading a page, search result or e-mail related to their ads.

 

Unfortunately, a database and shopping service doesn't look as much like an e-mail delivery service as it should according to the legal definitions in the ECPA. Thus, while Google promises not to peek into your e-mails or hand them to others, the danger is that this is now solely their contractual promise. With an e-mail delivery service covered by the ECPA, the law, not just Google's terms of service governs when your mail can be handed over, particularly to law enforcement."

 

That's nice and all, but what does it have to do with Groundspeak and profile pages here.

 

I still laugh when people go out of their way to protect the privacy of a made up identity. 99% of the people on this site are using a made up alias, not their legal name ....

Link to comment

i just came across this article, it should put to rest the subject

How so? It's hardly an authoritative source.

 

right :rolleyes:

 

if you don't keep up with developments in your own country, you must at least be able to use google to verify it

The article you cited is in a student newspaper. Cherry picking is not verifying and sneering at people when they raise the issue is really uncalled for.

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...
Followers 6
×
×
  • Create New...