Jump to content

Stop adventure labs


Recommended Posts

And, that's why it's called a "Multi cache". Because otherwise it'd have been a bunch of traditionals. The point to the multi-cache was to provide a single experience with multiple waypoints (which may or may not be physical containers). There's no cache type that provides a "find" for more than one waypoint in the listing. Adventure Labs aren't Cache Types.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Groundspeak just introduced a new low for AL with the Multiple-choices Answers....

 

You will just need to go in the Geofence and try up to 4 answers to get your +1. No needs to even read the description and find the sign/object...

 

Please Stop AL that's not geocaching.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
Link to post

Hi. I joined geocache last July and really enjoyed it. I’ve enjoyed almost every types that they offer until today, Adventure Lab. I’m aware of Labs when joining last summer, but it didn’t show up on my app, so I have no interest going after them. Then we all got an update to include them on the map which made my interest go back up for it. So, at first I liked the idea of Adventure Lab and I decided to do one today and completed it. But then I checked my statistic and was surprised to see a big jump, I didn’t realize the recent Adventure Lab I’ve done counts as 5 finds! That kind of diminishes the authenticity of all finds from caches shown on the map. I treated this Adventure Lab as a Multi Virtual just the same as Multi Caches. I also wishes it counts as one find. I remember when I did my first Multi, I was at first disappointed that I only got 1 find. But after a while I’ve grown to appreciate a Multi where I need to go thru several obstacles to make the final find. I just felt that should be treated just as the same as AL as every other caches. So I’ve decided to remove it from my count list and ignore all AL. No big deal, there’s plenty of other caches to find! 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 3
Link to post
On 8/25/2020 at 8:48 PM, MartyBartfast said:

 

Agree 100%

They should have the same rules as a multi  - though i originally felt you should get smileys for those stages - i now understand that those are for the complete challenge and as such should also have higher Difficulty level for doing all that work versus  a single traditional cache  (generally speaking)  

  • Funny 1
Link to post
3 hours ago, LeftyLeo said:

They should have the same rules as a multi  - though i originally felt you should get smileys for those stages - i now understand that those are for the complete challenge and as such should also have higher Difficulty level for doing all that work versus  a single traditional cache  (generally speaking)

 

Part of the "reward" for a Multi, Wherigo, etc that require extra stages/stages is that they have a different icon which are tracked in your stats.

Link to post

Just wanted to note that HQ is still referring to Adventure Labs separately from geocaches, at least per the new Big Blue Switch Day souvenir announcement. Earn it "by finding a geocache, Adventure Lab, or attending an event."

Link to post

They are referred to separately according to this pinned post from March 30: 

They acknowledge that there will be some overlap... your Groundspeak account for geocaching.com and for adventure labs is the same, and ALs will still be counted in your geocaching stats. But ALs are intended to be a different product with a different audience while still maintaining some overlap. 

Look, many of you taking your stats way too seriously to the point where you're letting how stats are calculated dictate whether or not you play certain parts of the game... or the game at all. While I can't tell you how to enjoy geocaching, taking that approach seems pretty petty and minimizes the fun of just going out and exploring and finding hides that others put out for you. Do numbers really matter? Does how someone else play the game really affect your enjoyment of it? If so, you might want to step back and analyze why that's the case.

  • Upvote 1
  • Love 3
Link to post
3 minutes ago, Mineral2 said:

Look, many of you taking your stats way too seriously to the point where you're letting how stats are calculated dictate whether or not you play certain parts of the game... or the game at all. While I can't tell you how to enjoy geocaching, taking that approach seems pretty petty and minimizes the fun of just going out and exploring and finding hides that others put out for you. Do numbers really matter? Does how someone else play the game really affect your enjoyment of it? If so, you might want to step back and analyze why that's the case.

If number doesn't matter why the E.T. power trail exist?

 

Why Armchair logger exists then?

Link to post
2 minutes ago, Mineral2 said:

Do numbers really matter?

If they didn't they wouldn't be visible at all :)  But since they are, they have a meaning. That meaning is admittedly somewhat subjective or arbitrary, but until recently it was quite objective in what it indicates.

 

2 minutes ago, Mineral2 said:

Look, many of you taking your stats way too seriously to the point where you're letting how stats are calculated dictate whether or not you play certain parts of the game...

While I can't say no one takes their "stats way too seriously", this is about more than just statistics. Numbers do have meaning. And until ALs, the find count was 1:1 related to the number of geocache listings (including events and other virtual style listings) that have been logged as found or the equivalent.  This same issue came up when Geocaching Challenges were counted in the Finds, then separated to their own count, then removed altogether.  If ALs aren't caches, then one wouldn't expect them to count as Geocache finds. But, as they are, the implied (maybe inferred) meaning of the smiley-count is much harder to ascertain on a glance. The meaning of the smiley count is diluted because of the implemented mechanic of ALs.

One trip down the Lincoln Highway and that count accomplishment is heavily weighted toward non-geocaches, toward enter-code-on-phone smileys, the least amount of effort to 'find' a listing/adventure-location in the realm of geocaching.  It's a smiley count now, combining two 'games' (for lack of a better term), not a found-geocaching-listing count.

 

There's a reason why many are bothered by this smiley-per-stage mechanic, and not everyone is upset because of comparative/competitive statistics with other people. It's true that what someone else does that doesn't affect you shouldn't bother you at all. And for myself, I'd greatly encourage people not to let that bother them; it's just better for your health :P But, there's an inherent meaning to things, and for many people smileys indicate something which is greatly changing with the relatively massive increase of smiley giveaways. From these discussions it seems many bothered by smiley-per-location wouldn't be nearly as bugged if it were one-per-adventure, just like other multi-location/stage geocaches.

Link to post
37 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 Numbers do have meaning. And until ALs, the find count was 1:1 related to the number of geocache listings (including events and other virtual style listings) that have been logged as found or the equivalent. 

 

Well, sorta...   There's a lot of new people in the forums, who may not know that "multiple logging on one cache" was a thing.   :)

Until May, 2017,   you could even log your own cache found numerous times.  Then there's "moving" caches, and those "brass caps"...

These forums have many who did this, asked about their stat errors, then were embarrassed when found out.  :D

 

But I agree, numbers do have meaning, which is why I don't understand why HQ would go back to this sorta stuff...

Link to post
21 minutes ago, cerberus1 said:

Well, sorta...   There's a lot of new people in the forums, who may not know that "multiple logging on one cache" was a thing.   :)

Well yes, but it hasn't been that way for yeeeears. Which implies that 1:1 for listings is sort of relevant. :mellow:

Link to post
3 hours ago, Mineral2 said:

Look, many of you taking your stats way too seriously to the point where you're letting how stats are calculated dictate whether or not you play certain parts of the game... or the game at all. While I can't tell you how to enjoy geocaching, taking that approach seems pretty petty and minimizes the fun of just going out and exploring and finding hides that others put out for you. Do numbers really matter? Does how someone else play the game really affect your enjoyment of it? If so, you might want to step back and analyze why that's the case.

 

I'm not really much into stat-based stuff, and rarely look at other people's stats, but one thing I do focus on is my milestone caches. For my 500th find I visited Lord Howe Island (600km off the coast of Australia) to do a particularly appealing 2.5/4 multi, and my most recent one at 1000 became a group venture to a particularly challenging 2.5/4.5 cache that was a full day's hiking through rugged and spectacular terrain. My next official milestone is at 2000 finds and for that I'd like to think I'll have put in the same amount of effort to get there as I did for my first thousand. But the five-for-one scoring of ALs makes a mockery of that, so much so that I made the decision late last year to delete all my AL finds from my stats.

 

For me, a find is completing the whole of the challenge the CO has set and writing a log about my experience to share with other players. Completing the whole of an AL sort of comes close to that but an individual waypoint of one does not.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
On 4/20/2021 at 7:31 PM, Lynx Humble said:

If number doesn't matter why the E.T. power trail exist?

 

Why Armchair logger exists then?

Numbers matter. But not for everyone :-)

Some are addicted to statistics, others find them less important

Link to post

Haven't been able to cache much for the last couple of years  because of family matters (caring for a 94 year old mom). ALs allow me to fo out in the minuscule free time I now have  and get maybe 5 or 6 caches. 

As I said before "IF YOU DON'T LIKE THEM, DON'T DO THEM."

No onehas a gun to your head.

  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
  • Love 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, Wacka said:

Haven't been able to cache much for the last couple of years  because of family matters (caring for a 94 year old mom).

I have been looking after my mother too since last year. My caching outings have much reduced. I also want to go travelling, but can't. (Since I retired, I used to travel for weeks and even months a year. Now tethered.) This is where power trails come into their own. I can take my mother for a drive and find ten to fifteen caches along the power trail, while she sits in the car. Get a coffee in a café and then go home.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post

I browsed the topic but I didn't notice this covered, sorry if it has.  Why are Adventure Lab caches that the other cachers do, a secret?  When I am on my totals page, I can click on my lab caches and see what I have done.  When I'm on another cacher's page, all I get is an ad for the app at the play store.  Why is it a secret what others are doing?

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
2 hours ago, Team Bullis said:

Why are Adventure Lab caches that the other cachers do, a secret?

Not quite sure if I understand the question, but when I open any AL and click on "Activity" (top left) I can see all users who have left a log entry for this AL.

 

 

  • Funny 2
Link to post
3 hours ago, Team Bullis said:

When I'm on another cacher's page, all I get is an ad for the app at the play store.  Why is it a secret what others are doing?

 

19 minutes ago, Mausebiber said:

Not quite sure if I understand the question, but when I open any AL and click on "Activity" (top left) I can see all users who have left a log entry for this AL.

 

 

If you go to someone's profile you can see their finds and hides. But for adventure labs you only get a number. You cannot see which Adventure Labs they have completed.

  • Helpful 1
Link to post
8 hours ago, Team Bullis said:

I browsed the topic but I didn't notice this covered, sorry if it has.  Why are Adventure Lab caches that the other cachers do, a secret?  When I am on my totals page, I can click on my lab caches and see what I have done.  When I'm on another cacher's page, all I get is an ad for the app at the play store.  Why is it a secret what others are doing?

 

That's a good question.    :)   People curious about their friends "stats", this odd cache type won't show that.

We've wondered about that for some time.  

We thought maybe it might have to do with "numbers" (that multiple "smileys" for one cache thing), that hasn't been allowed for some time.

Especially when labs finally counted for a smiley.

 - But IIRC, the original "labs" had the same thing - you couldn't see what labs others did.

Link to post
7 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

 

If you go to someone's profile you can see their finds and hides. But for adventure labs you only get a number. You cannot see which Adventure Labs they have completed.

 

Or even the ones they own. Why is that kept secret?

Link to post
10 hours ago, Team Bullis said:

Why are Adventure Lab caches that the other cachers do, a secret?

 

30 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

Or even the ones they own. Why is that kept secret?

 

Why can't they be found via map?

Why can't they be logged normally via website?

Why don't they have a difficulty and terrain rating?

[....]

 

That's all what we expect for geocaches. So the answer to all these questions is easy: lab "caches" are no geocaches so the known things don't work for them. :-(

  • Upvote 3
  • Love 1
Link to post
6 hours ago, barefootjeff said:
13 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

 

If you go to someone's profile you can see their finds and hides. But for adventure labs you only get a number. You cannot see which Adventure Labs they have completed.

 

Or even the ones they own. Why is that kept secret?

 

I'm guessing now because the links all go to the advanced search, and ALs have no web-based search function.

  • Helpful 1
Link to post
On 8/25/2020 at 3:49 PM, cerberus1 said:

 

Maybe I don't get it, but curious... You've found 151, and had five published yourself.  What made you change your views now

Thanks.    :)

 

We agree that "adventure labs" aren't like geocaching as we know it.  We didn't do any "regular" labs at events either.  

 - At that time it messed with the other 2/3rd's stats.   ;)

We were told that labs were an experimental thing, and now to have them count as finds (for every stage done...) doesn't make much sense (to us).

Especially when some can be done without ever leaving the house...

 

But we still have friends who believe the doom n gloom on the news, and won't leave their houses yet, and we don't blame them for that...

If there's some way they can still sorta play, if nothing else but to take their mind off whatever issues they feel they currently have, I don't think that's a bad thing.

We've seen how some come by numbers, and stats haven't meant anything to us in some time.

If folks are concerned about what this cache type is doing to their stats, isn't it easiest to just skip 'em ? 

 


I think these are good points. In addition, I would add a couple of things to this discussion -

 

1. there are all ready games where you can go to places to claim a find - think munzee. I don’t play these games because they don’t appeal to me - it seems a lot like checking into Facebook that you have arrived SOMEWHERE. (I know there’s more to it than that, I’m simplifying)

 

2. one of the great things about geocaching is the thrill of the hunt, and being free to approach from any angle (sometimes the wrong one!) and the way that someone’s a simple cache will take forever or the way you can sometimes walk up to a very hard one and feel great about snagging it so fast. I myself use geocaching as a way of meditation, of tuning things out, focusing on the cache, and challenging my mind.

 

3. if I wanted a guided tour of a place, I’d go to a museum. Geocaching is about gaining your own experiences in a world that is all ready packed full of people telling you what to think and where to go and how to experience something. I certainly don’t go to a park so that I can have someone quiz me on my experience. 
 

I understand that these “adventure labs” are targeting a different audience, and I am grateful that there is a while separate app for them and that I can hide them on the cache app. I agree with what others have said that they should not count as per of the finds in geocaching.  If a person were to do a bunch of ALs and gain, say, 1000 “finds”, their logs would have a much different weight to them, even if they’ve only found say 3-4 trad. Caches. It would look like they had experience that they do not.

 

anyway, these are my thoughts of a rainy Monday.

  • Upvote 3
  • Helpful 2
Link to post
On 3/9/2021 at 4:52 PM, Lynx Humble said:

Groundspeak just introduced a new low for AL with the Multiple-choices Answers....

 

You will just need to go in the Geofence and try up to 4 answers to get your +1. No needs to even read the description and find the sign/object...

 

Please Stop AL that's not geocaching.

There was never a need to read a description. All you have to do is answer a question. Example: What color is the sky ?

Link to post
1 hour ago, rustynails. said:

There was never a need to read a description. All you have to do is answer a question. Example: What color is the sky ?

That's true of many ALs. However I came upon one the other day that required the description to be read, as some research needed to be done before embarking on the AL, as the answers weren't to be found at the WPs. I didn't pre-read the description....

First I cycled to where the icon was on the map, thinking I could start this one. I got there, pulled out the phone and the 1st WP jumped to a few kms away :o:mad:. I didn't have time to cycle to the 'real' 1st WP that day, as I had to get home. I found that very annoying. A few days later I had time to cycle to the 'real' 1st WP. (Why are some 1st WPs allowed to be shown where they really aren't?) When I got to the real 1st WP I discovered the answer could not be found there (and later the same for the other WPs), and I had been meant to research the information before I got there. So home I went to research this on my computer. A few days later I tried again and this time managed three of the WPs, before I had to cycle off home again. These days I have limited time for caching.

 

So for some ALs, it is necessary to read the description first.

Link to post
10 minutes ago, Goldenwattle said:

So for some ALs, it is necessary to read the description first.

 

Indeed, as sometimes the description contains important information you ought to know before setting out. For example, some I've done have waypoints that are only accessible at certain times, such as places with restricted opening hours or tidal access. There's no requirement for ALs to be straightforward and easy either.

 

My first one, Wreck of the Maitland, could be done without reading the description, although it might come as a bit of a shock to the system when you discover that it's a 5km loop hike with an elevation change of 160 metres down and back up again. But without reading the description, you'll probably be scratching your head wondering why you've walked all that way just to look at a rusty lump of iron sitting on a rocky headland, because there's no signage there telling you it's actually one of the few remaining relics of an 1898 shipwreck.

 

But sure, if all you want is the smileys then most of the time you can probably skip the description, and for multiple choice ones you don't even need to read the questions.

  • Helpful 1
Link to post
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, barefootjeff said:

 

Indeed, as sometimes the description contains important information you ought to know before setting out. For example, some I've done have waypoints that are only accessible at certain times, such as places with restricted opening hours or tidal access. There's no requirement for ALs to be straightforward and easy either.

 

My first one, Wreck of the Maitland, could be done without reading the description, although it might come as a bit of a shock to the system when you discover that it's a 5km loop hike with an elevation change of 160 metres down and back up again. But without reading the description, you'll probably be scratching your head wondering why you've walked all that way just to look at a rusty lump of iron sitting on a rocky headland, because there's no signage there telling you it's actually one of the few remaining relics of an 1898 shipwreck.

 

But sure, if all you want is the smileys then most of the time you can probably skip the description, and for multiple choice ones you don't even need to read the questions.

Yes, I have said before that if it's a remote, difficult cache, I read the description before attempting it, along with logs and the hint. For everyday caches, I don't, unless I can't find help in first the hint, and then other logs. Only after that does the description rate for me, for ordinary caches, because nine times out of ten, the description says nothing useful.

This AL was not remote. The description was not that useful in that either, as the links suggested to research the necessary information were useless. I had to find other sources to get the answers.

I rarely read the description in the field, as it's too hard to read on my small Garmin. I tend to read the description when I am logging. For the same reason I print out multies before attempting one, as I have made mistakes trying to read it off the GPS.

Edited by Goldenwattle
  • Surprised 1
Link to post

Or, ALs could have all their waypoints on the same coordinates with a fence that surrounds a large area, and each 'location' you complete provides instructions to 'find' the next answer somewhere in that radius.  At least there you know where the AL takes place in its entirety - likely if you've read the description and know that yo udon't need to keep going back to the center where the location waypoints indicate.

 

There are variations to the 'default' mechanic that reading the description will absolutely make clear. So while I wouldn't say reading the description is universally required (of course it isn't) there are certainly cases in which it can be. And legitimate cases.

 

It would really suck if you got to a location to find out the answer isn't there - one would expect that to be the case; but perhaps there's a reason it's set up like that? Personally though, I'd probably avoid that in creating it just because for those people who don't read, they may give up and bomb the AL rating out of frustration. Another reason 'quality' ratings (as opposed to "+1" style positive bumps) aren't always such a good idea... :P

Link to post
2 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

That's true of many ALs. However I came upon one the other day that required the description to be read, as some research needed to be done before embarking on the AL, as the answers weren't to be found at the WPs. I didn't pre-read the description....

First I cycled to where the icon was on the map, thinking I could start this one. I got there, pulled out the phone and the 1st WP jumped to a few kms away :o:mad:. I didn't have time to cycle to the 'real' 1st WP that day, as I had to get home. I found that very annoying. A few days later I had time to cycle to the 'real' 1st WP. (Why are some 1st WPs allowed to be shown where they really aren't?) When I got to the real 1st WP I discovered the answer could not be found there (and later the same for the other WPs), and I had been meant to research the information before I got there. So home I went to research this on my computer. A few days later I tried again and this time managed three of the WPs, before I had to cycle off home again. These days I have limited time for caching.

 

So for some ALs, it is necessary to read the description first.

There's something about this that doesn't seem allowable to me. I can't quite figure it out. 

Link to post
8 hours ago, Goldenwattle said:

Yes, I have said before that if it's a remote, difficult cache, I read the description before attempting it, along with logs and the hint. For everyday caches, I don't, unless I can't find help in first the hint, and then other logs. Only after that does the description rate for me, for ordinary caches, because nine times out of ten, the description says nothing useful.

This AL was not remote. The description was not that useful in that either, as the links suggested to research the necessary information were useless. I had to find other sources to get the answers.

I rarely read the description in the field, as it's too hard to read on my small Garmin. I tend to read the description when I am logging. For the same reason I print out multies before attempting one, as I have made mistakes trying to read it off the GPS.

 

ALs don't have D/T ratings, attributes or anything else to show if it's going to be difficult or remote, so how do you tell without looking at the description? My Wreck of the Maitland one starts in the semi-rural suburb of Killcare Heights in a car park surrounded by houses.

 

image.png.d67a75776dc437c6d0e8df4b5fc5a272.png

 

The top-level AL map doesn't show this level of detail, though, like any of the trails going off into the national park on the right, so you won't get any hint from it that there's anything of interest down there.

 

ALMap.jpg.adadc5200e4e264629a35b5efeee3664.jpg

 

It does tell you that there a couple of bed-and-breakfasts and an interior decoration shop in the area, though, which I guess is important for someone doing an AL.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
9 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

There's no requirement for ALs to be straightforward and easy either.

With no reviewer oversight, no proximity restrictions, and a few guidelines, we are given a lot of leeway in creating these Adventure Labs.  My first one was pretty straighforward, but does involve about 10 miles of driving on rural roads.  Some enjoyed the drive, others complained it was too long and too much driving.  You can't please everyone!

 

I was awarded another, and have yet to put that one together. I want to make it more of a challenge, and let those who complete it feel like they EARNED those 5 smilies!  I fully expect to get grief from the ones that want 5 quick smilies.  I'm hoping to challenge folks into thinking, and working to get each smilie, and hoping most will enjoy the experience.  I'm not sure what it will look like yet.

 

I enjoy doing the AL's, and I keep the 5 smilies I get  (55 so far, 11 labs), and usually write a comment at the end, although I don't like logging on the phone and prefer to sit at my computer with a glass of wine at the end of the day and compose my logs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post

 

3 hours ago, barefootjeff said:

The top-level AL map doesn't show this level of detail, though, like any of the trails going off into the national park on the right, so you won't get any hint from it that there's anything of interest down there.

I would hope that the first WP is actually there though. It's at the start of a trail, so it would be expected the AL and the following WPs to be a walk thought the bushland. The AL I mentioned thought was in the centre of Canberra, not at a bushland walk start. I also expected the first WP to be where it was on the map, not kms away. Maybe for the second WP, which I would discover where that was when I found the first and plan for it, and find another time for a short escape. Fair enough. The first WP though should be where it is @#* shown.  After cycling there, I then went away disappointed, and had to then plan for another day to find it. Then after managing another short escape I got there after pushing and riding my bike through an overgrown thistle infested paddock, and looked around for the answer, only to find none. I then found the information advising to go to an internet site for information. Home I went to access that site on my computer. Fortunately once at the actual WP1 I discovered the old abandoned road route with no thistles, which was easier than the route I came. After I found the information (but not from the useless site I was given) I returned. I managed three WPs that day, before I had to go home and cook dinner. I am caring for my mother, and don't have the freedom I used to have. I found the other WPs and the bonus on several more different trips. I did have the bonus of finding an apple tree with nice apples, and I filled a bicycle pannier with them. So, no it's not about getting five/six quick smilies. I didn't. It's about being able to get maybe one each limited visit. Some of us don't have the freedom to muck around with these. Sorry if my annoyance is showing. (What I actually want to do is get in my car and drive for several weeks as I used to do, finding 'real' caches; maybe even for months.)

I did enjoy visiting the places the AL took me and the information at each WP was interesting, and I enjoyed those apples I picked, both fresh and stewed.

Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Goldenwattle said:

I would hope that the first WP is actually there though. It's at the start of a trail, so it would be expected the AL and the following WPs to be a walk thought the bushland.

 

Except, as I said, the AL map doesn't show any of the trails through the national park so unless you actually open the AL before you get there to see where the waypoints are or read the description, there's no way to know ahead of time what to expect from just looking at the app's main map. If I was going blind into that one, I might think some or all the waypoint information would be in and around the Maitland Bay Information Centre since that's pretty prominent on the map, but no, that won't help, particularly as it now appears to have been permanently closed due to COVID. The first waypoint is at the start of the Maitland Bay trail, and normally it's a loop track so that's where you end up when you've finished it too, but at the moment one of the trail segments is closed for reconstruction so for now it can only be done as three separate walks. The bonus cache, by the way, is only a short walk from the car park, so I'm not being evil but it is a pretty tough hike that would have earned 4 terrain stars had it been a proper cache, but the only way for me to convey that in the AL app is in the words I put in the overview and waypoint descriptions.

Edited by barefootjeff
Link to post

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...