Jump to content

Audit Logs to be retired


The A-Team
Followers 6

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

For those who haven't noticed, an announcement was made a few hours ago by HQ:

 

Thoughts? Concerns?

 

Personally, I won't miss them. I've never made any of my caches PMO and therefore haven't used the logs myself. However, we've seen a number of cases mentioned here in the forums where innocent cachers were harrassed simply because they viewed a cache listing and showed up on the audit log. Since there are multiple ways to get around the audit log and it often seems to cause angst, I think retiring them is A Good Thing™.

 

I won't miss them either. I have used the PMO feature for some of our cache hides but never looked at the audit log because I felt uneasy and never found a good reason to. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

I'm glad this is happening. I had made one of my caches premium when it was going through a rough spell of going missing and I looked at the audit log out of curiosity a few times. A few times was enough to tell me there wasn't much value or interest in knowing who viewed the listing and when. For me, it was a forgettable feature.

 

14 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

However, we've seen a number of cases mentioned here in the forums where innocent cachers were harrassed simply because they viewed a cache listing and showed up on the audit log.

 This is what bugged me about the audit log. Years ago, I was scrolling around the map, checking out puzzle caches in a city that was about two hours drive from home. I got an email from a CO that owned some of those caches. It was just the CO stating that if I wanted any help with any of his puzzle caches (most were difficult and beyond my ability to solve and all were premium), don't be afraid to ask. It was a nice gesture and it wasn't harassment, but it did kind of creep me out. After that, I avoided looking at premium cache pages for a little while.

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

For those who haven't noticed, an announcement was made a few hours ago by HQ:

Thoughts? Concerns?

 

Personally, I won't miss them.

I've never made any of my caches PMO and therefore haven't used the logs myself. However, we've seen a number of cases mentioned here in the forums where innocent cachers were harrassed simply because they viewed a cache listing and showed up on the audit log.

Since there are multiple ways to get around the audit log and it often seems to cause angst, I think retiring them is A Good Thing™.

Do I have to pay "someone" now every time I say something's a "good thing" ?   :D

 

I say it's about time...    

I believe more than a few know by now what we went through, when some believed that the audit meant something other than simply who looked at your cache.

Didn't do anything to keep basic members from logging,  and PMs knew how to bypass it.   Just didn't make sense anymore...   

To be clear, I like the idea of a premium member-only cache.    :)

 

 

 

Link to comment

Nice to see that no one in the forums really cares that the audit log will be gone.

 

The announcement says:

 

"Due to privacy concerns and GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) considerations, we will remove the Audit Log ..."

 

Do you think the "All Geocache Finds" link will be eliminated too someday, because of the GDPR and privacy concerns? 

 

993971247_ScreenShot2019-10-25at7_04_38PM.png.b1303cde16d60573422950fd7da0c1e9.png

 

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment

Not sure how I feel about this....

 

We own a travel bug hotel that is PMO.   There was stretch where an account with no finds and a number name was looking at it once a week for a year.   It stopped a few months ago but we were never sure what it was about. 

 

If travel bugs had been going missing that time I would probably associate the two but nothing weird was going on with the bugs.   I kind of liked that I had at list some idea of who was looking at the listing to protect the bugs in the cache.    

Link to comment
2 hours ago, schmittfamily said:

We own a travel bug hotel that is PMO.   There was stretch where an account with no finds and a number name was looking at it once a week for a year.   It stopped a few months ago but we were never sure what it was about. 

 

If travel bugs had been going missing that time I would probably associate the two but nothing weird was going on with the bugs.   

I kind of liked that I had at list some idea of who was looking at the listing to protect the bugs in the cache.    

 

False sense of security.  The audit log only shows those who don't know how to bypass it.   :)

 - You'd have no real idea who it even might be if anything ever happened to your cache (and the trackables inside).

 

One of our issues was a CO who saw I was "looking at their cache" more than a couple times every-other month or so

My traveling distance for caches I'll do means I'd like to check once-in-a-while in case one is ever placed close by.

Well, one (an ammo can hide) turned up missing, and guess who the knucklehead blamed to anyone who'd listen ?

 - It was found thirty feet from GZ by a friend of ours.    The jerk never did apologize, but quit the hobby a short time later...

Link to comment
40 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

Well, one (an ammo can hide) turned up missing, and guess who the knucklehead blamed to anyone who'd listen ?

 - It was found thirty feet from GZ by a friend of ours.    The jerk never did apologize, but quit the hobby a short time later...

What was that old saying? "Some people are not meant to be COs".

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
7 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

Nice to see that no one in the forums really cares that the audit log will be gone.

 

I guess that the feature was originally meant to add some value for premium players and the effect is negligible because nowadays most players are premium members to use their gadgets.

Link to comment

My only use of the audit log feature was to see if anyone was interested in visiting the cache.  The more recent the visitor (as well as the frequency), the more likely they were coming to seek out the cache.  That way I could go out and check on it if I thought anyone might be heading toward it.  Other than that, I rarely used it.  It's not a huge loss.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment

Wow, that was the one and only attraction of PMO status for me.

I've never made a newly-published cache PMO but was it was interesting to see whether my adopted PMO caches were getting any traffic whatsoever.

 

A hopelessly flawed measure, as outlined above, but when you're talking about multis/night-caches that are lucky to get >2 finders in any 12 month period, it's vaguely reassuring to occasionally check and find the caches are at least not completely invisible. And found logs have seemed to correlate pretty well with a prior history of hits on the site. Though I certainly wouldn't think to message someone just because they were showing up in audit logs!

Edited by BendSinister
  • Upvote 1
  • Love 3
Link to comment

Yep... only last week I was thinking about posting a feature request to expand the audit log to all caches owned by a premium member, and to include visits from apps as well..... that might have went down like the Pb balloon! 

Maybe an anonymised version would keep the privacy wowsers happy? ie the same list just without the names, or even a date of the last view, number of views etc? 

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 3
Link to comment
2 hours ago, lee737 said:

Yep... only last week I was thinking about posting a feature request to expand the audit log to all caches owned by a premium member, and to include visits from apps as well..... that might have went down like the Pb balloon! 

Maybe an anonymised version would keep the privacy wowsers happy? ie the same list just without the names, or even a date of the last view, number of views etc? 

 

Almost by definition an anonymised list would meet the requirements of anyone interested in their basic web privacy being protected. Assuming that the servers can be cleared of the actual data regarding cache page visits on request (or preferably by default after a period - which I assume will have to happen anyway).

 

I'm not sure how useful any resulting data would be, but if it's essentially page views then I would think it would meet the requirements.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, L0ne.R said:

I  remember the old days, some COs put hit counters on their cache pages.

 

But most we noticed weren't accurate,  just like this audit thing.   Still have to enter the site to get them to function.     :)

Folks want to use PQs, lists, bookmarks...  They want to load entire states/countries.   :D   

 - Remaining off-site, they don't trip a counter or audit.  Heck, just simply using a phone doesn't show either... 

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
On ‎10‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 4:15 PM, The A-Team said:

//Due to privacy concerns and GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) considerations, we will remove the Audit Log on Premium-only caches on October 31. //

 

This is the 2nd time in a month that some company has told me that "Due to Governmental Decree, our company is removing value from the product you pay for". 

 

I'm noticing a trend of corporations not simply saying "you get less now".  :ph34r:

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
On ‎10‎/‎26‎/‎2019 at 12:29 AM, colleda said:

What was that old saying? "Some people are not meant to be COs".

 

 

We know some (here in the forums, on puzzles mostly too...) say they'll use the audit to ask a cacher if they might need more help.   :)

 And that sounds innocent enough...

Most my caching is single, or just a couple, at a good distance from us. In this hobby, I want a good walk in the woods, and that's rare here.

After the second or third time of simply looking at a cache page, once in a while a CO would ask if we needed help.

I'd say no, and continued looking at the same caches time-to-time, just waiting for another close-by enough to warrant a run that distance for it.

Eventually the emails became "when are you going for this?" ... and on a couple, caches would turn up missing.

 So tack on a couple similar, with that one who told anyone that'd listen about that thievin' Cerberus, and things got real ugly for us.  

I finally  just stopped doing PMOs altogether...  

Lucky (I guess...) that it wasn't a local thing.       All those micro-managing-but-unknowing COs were from out of our area.

 - Unlike when we started the same time as a local cache maggot.  :D     

Great luck, huh ?

 

I like the idea of a "premium members only" cache.  And by the announcement it appears that's not changing.

 It's just that audit that comes with it , that I've had actual issues with,  is why I steer clear of 'em ... 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment

I travel a lot, and I'll look at caches in the area that I'm traveling in. I end up only doing a handful, usually. I always wonder what the pm co's think about my looking (especially if I look at a page more than once, or come back to the area later and look again), especially when I don't find the caches. I've worried that I would get an email, but I never have. This will be a relief to me, not having someone watching what I'm doing. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

Strange to see these reactions about CO's knowing who looks at the listings. There are other ways to do the same without people even knowing their visits are logged. I'm sure that those who oppose(d) the audit possibility don't use facebook/google and so on.... or not ;)

 

 

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
28 minutes ago, Ambrosia said:

I travel a lot, and I'll look at caches in the area that I'm traveling in. I end up only doing a handful, usually. I always wonder what the pm co's think about my looking (especially if I look at a page more than once, or come back to the area later and look again), especially when I don't find the caches. I've worried that I would get an email, but I never have. This will be a relief to me, not having someone watching what I'm doing. 

 

Yeah.  Sometimes I have an idea of something to look for on the cache page (for trickery on a page itself that isn't in a Pocket Query). But in the case of insane CO, I hesitate to return. Now I may check some of the tough or unfound puzzles a little more often.  It was creepy to return to a page and see something like "Way too many people are viewing this page lately, so I removed the cache description".

 

But I wish TPTB had framed this deprecation in a different way.  "We haven't updated this feature to include App visits and stuff, and therefore it's not particularly useful anymore.  Sorry, we're getting rid of it", rather than the usual "Shadowy Overlords demand it be deleted.  That makes it cool, so everyone will approve."

  • Funny 3
Link to comment

As a CO of many puzzle caches, I found it useful to get a good sense of how difficult and interesting my puzzles were to other cachers.  Many repeat visits from someone generally meant that it held their interest enough to want to look at it again.  No visits in a long time or only single visits from a lot of folks often gave me reason to consider packing it up and archiving the cache.  

 

So count me as another who isn't all that happy about this decision...but then, I'm used to Groundspeak making decisions I'm not happy with, so what else is new?

  • Upvote 5
  • Love 4
Link to comment

It might be a good thing - we don't leave too many of ours PMO, so don't use this option much, aside from seeing who is looking at a new publication..... but I thought I'd look at our 'best' cache last night - only published earlier this year, well received, with 14 FPs from 15 finds. Nobody has viewed the page now for 2 months..... :( Better not to look.

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
21 minutes ago, lee737 said:

It might be a good thing - we don't leave too many of ours PMO, so don't use this option much, aside from seeing who is looking at a new publication..... but I thought I'd look at our 'best' cache last night - only published earlier this year, well received, with 14 FPs from 15 finds. Nobody has viewed the page now for 2 months..... :( Better not to look.

 

Looks like a fun one, I must keep it in mind next time I'm going up that side of the lake, and make sure I have an FP spare too.

  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
On ‎10‎/‎27‎/‎2019 at 12:49 AM, lee737 said:

Maybe an anonymised version would keep the privacy wowsers happy? ie the same list just without the names, or even a date of the last view, number of views etc? 

 

It would need to be very anonymized. There definitely couldn't be anything showing specific dates or times. If there was, the paranoid COs would still correlate a number of page visits with a log submitted shortly afterwards, even if that correlation is faulty. We don't want what cerberus1 has experienced to happen again.

 

I'd be fine with a total number of page views per month, and maybe a mildly-obfuscated "last viewed" date (something like "within the last week", "3 weeks ago", "2 months ago", etc.), in order to still show the level of interest in the cache. Of course, it would need to be updated to account for app views to provide more complete information. Even then, it wouldn't be fully complete because it wouldn't reflect the number of times the cache has been viewed in offline data (PQ downloads, downloaded via API, etc.).

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
On 10/25/2019 at 9:15 PM, The A-Team said:
  Quote

Due to privacy concerns and GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) considerations, we will remove the Audit Log on Premium-only caches on October 31. This is the tool that owners of Premium-only caches can use to see which users have viewed the cache page.

GDPR ? Which cache pages you open is a privacy issue ? <engages sarcasm mode> Yeah, that sounds likely. <ends sarcasm node>

 

Much more of a privacy issue : your cache logs available to read by absolutely anyone who cares t look at your profile, your photographs ditto, there's even a link in your profile so people can easily track your posts here ...

 

GDPR is an easy excuse to make  , blame the foreign legislation , so anyone disliking the change will blame the distant lawmakers not the company making the changes.

  • Upvote 3
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
5 minutes ago, hal-an-tow said:

GDPR ? Which cache pages you open is a privacy issue ? <engages sarcasm mode> Yeah, that sounds likely. <ends sarcasm node>

 

Much more of a privacy issue : your cache logs available to read by absolutely anyone who cares t look at your profile, your photographs ditto, there's even a link in your profile so people can easily track your posts here ...

 

GDPR is an easy excuse to make  , blame the foreign legislation , so anyone disliking the change will blame the distant lawmakers not the company making the changes.

 

It isn't a privacy issue, as the information you refer to is posted to a public venue, and can be withdrawn, as the nearby 'deleted user' thread details....

Link to comment
1 minute ago, lee737 said:

 

It isn't a privacy issue, as the information you refer to is posted to a public venue, and can be withdrawn, as the nearby 'deleted user' thread details....

A deleted user is no longer caching, which I suppose saves paying for a premium membership , perhaps  not the outcome TPTB would wish ?

 

Are logs on premium caches 'a public venue' , when the public cannot see them without paying ?

Link to comment
1 hour ago, hal-an-tow said:

Much more of a privacy issue : your cache logs available to read by absolutely anyone who cares t look at your profile, your photographs ditto, there's even a link in your profile so people can easily track your posts here ...

 

Maybe it's just me, but I choose to log caches, and choose to post pics.  I don't even look at it, yet I choose to leave my stats open.  :)

I didn't choose to be on someone's "audit" by merely clicking (even accidently, like through links in these forums...) their cache once...

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

Maybe it's just me, but I choose to log caches, and choose to post pics.  I don't even look at it, yet I choose to leave my stats open.  :)

I didn't choose to be on someone's "audit" by merely clicking (even accidently, like through links in these forums...) their cache once...

 

"Well my cache is gone now, and you're the only person to view it since it was found, so you OBVIOUSLY stole my cache!"

  • Upvote 1
  • Funny 6
Link to comment
3 hours ago, cerberus1 said:

 

Maybe it's just me, but I choose to log caches, and choose to post pics.  I don't even look at it, yet I choose to leave my stats open.  :)

I didn't choose to be on someone's "audit" by merely clicking (even accidently, like through links in these forums...) their cache once...

You should be aware that the audit exists on every cache page.  Only the PMO caches was the owner able to see it.  The PTB can see them all...

  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
8 hours ago, hal-an-tow said:

GDPR ? Which cache pages you open is a privacy issue ? <engages sarcasm mode> Yeah, that sounds likely. <ends sarcasm node>

 

Much more of a privacy issue : your cache logs available to read by absolutely anyone who cares t look at your profile, your photographs ditto, there's even a link in your profile so people can easily track your posts here ...

 

GDPR is an easy excuse to make  , blame the foreign legislation , so anyone disliking the change will blame the distant lawmakers not the company making the changes.

 

It's the retention of identifying data by other users which is a long standing privacy issue - iirc it predates GDPR in UK law, for example, by many years.

  • Helpful 3
Link to comment

I mainly used it to see if there were any lookers on a newly published cache.

Even that had limitations since the access points were not all leaving a tell-tale. So therefore of limited use, but still a little bit helpful.

Just dont see any privacy issue with the audit logs. Certainly not in comparison with your other posts and pics, as noted in the above post by hal-an-tow. If retention is truly an issue, delete certain items after a certain period of time.

 

On occasion I will go into a cache page just to see if the CO (who I know) is paying attention. No one has ever said a word.

  • Love 1
Link to comment

I am extremely disappointed over the removal of the audit logs.   I am truly surprised that there is anybody that doesn't like having them.  I just sent this message to HQ.

 

Hi.   I couldn't understand why all my audit logs went away.   Then I read in the announcement area that they have been removed.   This is VERY disappointing.   The reason I created most of my caches as Premium Only was to get the audit log....now there really isn't much of a reason to create Premium Only caches anymore.   I use the audit logs to determine interest in my caches and whether I should adjust their difficulty levels, etc.  It is fun to see who is trying my various puzzle caches and it's great when you see the same cachers taking interest.    I don't quite understand the privacy concerns as there is no way to know who a particular cacher is unless they choose to reveal information about themselves.   
I can't say emphatically enough how disappointing this is to me.   The decision to remove the audit logs truly takes much of the joy out of this game for me.
 

Edited by rtb2425777
  • Upvote 4
  • Love 2
Link to comment

Steak knives can be deadly if used *outside of their intended purpose*.  Heck, a simple pencil can be deadly *in the wrong hands*.  Shall we remove access to those tools, given the possible consequences of their misuse?

 

Incorrect use of the term "stalking" has become the norm in social media vernacular.  It has always carried with it quite negative connotations, and that used to be a correct perspective.  Now, though, simply looking at the post of another user is called "stalking".  It is not stalking; that term should be used for continuous, repetitive following of another's actions over a period of time ... not a quick look at a single action (or single series of actions).

Calling the Audit Log a "stalking tool" is an unfair characterization of the tool and of the CO who may use it.


Creepy?  Take a look at that profile access right there, in the left column, next to your forum post.  Sure, it *could* be used for stalking. Come to think of it, it may well be used for that purpose, and probably more often than is the Audit Tool.  (How's that for starting your day with a creepy thought?) Yet it is not vilified.  The Audit Tool is no more a tool for stalking than is that profile icon there.  Both of these ways to access cachers' activity information *could* be used for that purpose; it simply depends on the character of those choosing to use it.

 

Consider a shop-keeper monitoring the customers' activities, comings and goings.  It makes sense that easily 'lifted',  easily damaged, or more valuable items will have more attention focused on them than others.  It makes just as much sense that a CO would want to do the same.  The shop-keeper *could* misinterpret a customer's actions or mishandle the situation; almost none do.  A CO *could* abuse the use of the Audit Log, micromanaging and accusing the innocent; I would hazard a guess that almost none do.  How can you know which do or don't?  You can't.  That doesn't justify removing access to the monitoring tool for the many who don't misuse it.


It is very unfortunate that some one may have used the Audit Log for other purposes; however, I use it to check the pulse of my caches.

Example.  Cacher1 accesses the cache page 4 times on the same morning.  Later the same morning, Cacher2, who's already found the cache, accesses the page.  Then, another couple of views by Cacher1.  Then nothing.  I interpret this to mean I'd better check to make sure the cache is there or access is not blocked.  If it's there, perhaps it means they couldn't find it but didn't want to log a DNF.  It could also mean that they're planning a trip and asking a friend about the planned hunt.  Either way, it's a Good Thing, IMO, because I will have posted a note that the cache is [or isn't] ready to be found, and I will have prepared some hints in case I'm contacted by Cacher1.

Example. Six to twelve months go by without so much as a look at the cache page.  This means to me that it might be time to evaluate its attractiveness; maybe folks just don't like that type of cache or location.  Or it might be time to consider down-grading to non-PMO status if it also hasn't been muggled in a while (which I did in one case, when no more watches were on it).

Example. A few looks by cachers from far away.  Again, maybe they're plotting out a vay-cachin'.  That's usually the first time that it registers in my mind that a big event may be coming up. "Where's the Mega/Giga?" because it may be en route. Every now and then folks are just curious. :-) Nothing wrong with that; we're human. (One thing I haven't figured out is why a PMO gadget cache with a word-code lock in this little podunk town quite suddenly gets SEVERAL (like 3-5x the norm) new views from waaayyy-out-of-towners on the same day or within a few days of each other. Perhaps just a random anomoly.)

I have *never* initiated contact with a cacher because of activity that I might see using the Audit Log*, and I have *never* been asked why I visited a PMO cache multiple times, whether or not I posted a subsequent log.


*Full disclosure:  I did contact a person *known to me* who signed a PMO cache's physical logbook [didn't log it online; didn't show up in Audit Log], but it was mainly to tease that 40-something-year-old for choosing a whoopee cushion over a $5 bill. :-)   I did ask how he found it, too.  (He and his partner are Basic Members.)


Among others I agree most with ...

 

Lee737 & Kunarion's points,

On 10/27/2019 at 6:39 PM, kunarion said:

But I wish TPTB had framed this deprecation in a different way.  "We haven't updated this feature to include App visits and stuff, and therefore it's not particularly useful anymore.  Sorry, we're getting rid of it", rather than the usual "Shadowy Overlords demand it be deleted.  That makes it cool, so everyone will approve."

 

Jester & on4bam's

On 10/27/2019 at 6:10 PM, on4bam said:

There are other ways to do the same without people even knowing their visits are logged.

 

And, honestly, colleda's

On 10/25/2019 at 7:16 PM, colleda said:

I liked it. Colour me curious.

 

Add me to the disappointed list.

  • Upvote 5
  • Funny 1
  • Helpful 1
  • Love 3
Link to comment
6 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

Just a thought for puzzle caches, third party checkers like Geocheck and Certitude provide attempt logs which I find give a good indication of the level of interest and difficulty people are having.

 

Geocheckers only tell you if your puzzle is a guesswork puzzle, not about interest unless is it a such.

 

Simple visitor count graph could be used instead of audit log but it may be too expensive to develop. It's cheaper to ged rid of the old audit system totally. Cache owners can use external visitor counters. I put a counter to my first puzzle caches but later my interest ceased.

Link to comment
On 10/25/2019 at 9:15 PM, The A-Team said:

Thoughts? Concerns?

I have just spotted it's gone ....

I for one who did use the function ,,, a lot 

each visit I made to each cache page  I would look at the Audit log , it's just one of the thing I did 

 

and I'd still like to ....... so please reinstate it 

 

why why why are we pampering to the ( phone app society ) every thing seems to being geared up for phone apps

  

  • Upvote 2
  • Love 2
Link to comment

Vavapam, you make some excellent points.   Again, I simply don't understand the concern.   It seems like most here that approve of the removal hardly ever used the audit logs anyway.  For those of us that used them daily, its going to be very much missed.   In addition to the items I originally mentioned, another important point comes to mind.  What makes the game fun and interesting for me is the puzzles.   While I realize puzzles are not everyone's cup of tea, they are the only reason I stay in the game.   While I will find and log any cache, if the game didn't contain puzzles I'd have quit long ago.   Our puzzling community here in Atlanta is rather small; same 10 or so taking an interest in new puzzles.   If I post a new puzzle and I see the usual puzzlers looking at my puzzle each day, some gathering look counts of 20-30-40 etc, then I know I have created an interesting puzzle.  However, if I see those same puzzlers take a look or two and then abandon it, I know I have an issue with my puzzle.   I just created a new puzzle that was published yesterday.   I can't tell you how frustrating it is that I can't now take a look at local interest.   Have any of the local puzzlers taken a look?   Has nobody?   This is information that I need to know and now I cannot because someone once got accused of stealing a cache?   I have been playing this game since early 2016.....have probably viewed thousands of premium only caches.   Have never had a single issue.  Truly a case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.  

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 2
  • Love 1
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...