Creepy cacher

[+bluet]

Some friends of mine noticed that a WV area cacher was logging what seemed an impossible number of caches, because of geographic position, over a very short period of time. I agreed and sent an email calling him on it. He sent back a very nasty note stating he could tell me exactly where the caches were but wouldn't because I hadn't logged them. He also added some cracks about worthless old people. I pointed out that they were my caches and I couldn't log them. Then I started contacting some of the other cachers whose hides he had hit and several of them were also suspicious. One stated that he had already deleted a find he considered bogus and contacted the mysterious Cloaked_Cacher with no response. Now Cloaked_Cacher is logging finds in Italy. Please check out his logs for GCQXPK, GC7BA4. This is creepy. I no longer live in the WV area but I think this person is very weird. What do I do?

Edited December 13, 2006 by bluet

[Mushtang]

Why should you do anything? If you don't like how someone else plays the game, how is it bothering you?

 

If he posts a Find to one of your caches you can verify it with the log, and if he didn't sign the log delete the Find, but that's all you can do.

 

If you sent an email to every cacher that has "suspicious" finds, you'd never get anything else done.

[+fishingdude720]

ask him where it is if he doesnt respond delte them.

[+Right Wing Wacko]

Some friends of mine noticed that a WV area cacher was logging what seemed an impossible number of caches, because of geographic position, over a very short period of time. I agreed and sent an email calling him on it. He sent back a very nasty note stating he could tell me exactly where the caches were but wouldn't because I hadn't logged them. He also added some cracks about worthless old people. I pointed out that they were my caches and I couldn't log them. Then I started contacting some of the other cachers whose hides he had hit and several of them were also suspicious. One stated that he had already deleted a find he considered bogus and contacted the mysterious Cloaked_Cacher with no response. Now Cloaked_Cacher is logging finds in Italy. Please check out his logs for GCQXPK, GC7BA4. This is creepy. I no longer live in the WV area but I think this person is very weird. What do I do?

 

Normally I would say ignore him. Delete the logs on your caches if you can verify that he didn't sign the log.

 

However his latest log ... "Death to BlueT" puts him over the line.

[+bluet]

And to Neos, Who deleted his log. And he's doing something funny with TBs now too but who do I tell?

[+Wayfinders]

All on major interstates. Looks like a driver.

[+sbell111]

Did you actually go to your cache, read the log, and verify that he did not find it?

[+Mr Nibbler]

Interestingly the Italian ones are 900 miles and a stretch of sea apart - difficult to do on the same day. This suggests a number of options: a ) first one done early, caught a plane/very fast train/rocket, did the second one late; b ) catching up on logging caches done some time ago and unaware of the basics of date entry, or; c ) it's Walter Mitty.

 

Note: Other options may be available.

 

If he logged one of mine online and there was nothing in the logbook without giving a good reason then no discussion - log gone. Too easy. At least he isn't trashing caches like an idiot in this area recently.

Edited December 13, 2006 by Mr Nibbler

[Mushtang]

Interestingly the Italian ones are 900 miles and a stretch of sea apart - difficult to do on the same day. This suggests a number of options: a ) first one done early, caught a plane/very fast train/rocket, did the second one late; b ) catching up on logging caches done some time ago and unaware of the basics of date entry, or; c ) it's Walter Mitty.

 

Note: Other options may be available.

 

If he logged one of mine online and there was nothing in the logbook without giving a good reason then no discussion - log gone. Too easy. At least he isn't trashing caches like an idiot in this area recently.

The cacher's name is Cloaked_Cacher, so maybe the cloak is somehow magical?

 

I'd say that in order to log finds that far apart on the same day, regularly, would require an entire agency since a single person wouldn't be able to.

[IronMaiden]

This person has only been caching since Oct. 28, 2006 and has 111 fines?

 

Does it sound suspicious? Yep! Especially when most of the cache logs say,"Catching up on cache logs. TFTC"

 

I agree with Right Wing Wacko, I would verify and delete his log if he hasn't done it. Also I agree that saying,"Death to BlueT and Neos1." is really over the line. He's just mad that you two have called him on his cache fines.

 

Personally I would just ignore the person.

Edited December 13, 2006 by IronMaiden

[Tahosa and Sons]

I had a cacher come thru CO about 2 years ago. Supposedly found Caches all over the state and into Wyo all in one day. So I just deleted his find on my cache and that was that last I heard of him.

[+Maingray]

Report him to Groundspeak for abuse

 

"Greetings from WV USA

 

Death to BlueT and Neos1"

[+Mr Nibbler]

Interestingly the Italian ones are 900 miles and a stretch of sea apart - difficult to do on the same day. This suggests a number of options: a ) first one done early, caught a plane/very fast train/rocket, did the second one late; b ) catching up on logging caches done some time ago and unaware of the basics of date entry, or; c ) it's Walter Mitty.

 

Note: Other options may be available.

 

If he logged one of mine online and there was nothing in the logbook without giving a good reason then no discussion - log gone. Too easy. At least he isn't trashing caches like an idiot in this area recently.

The cacher's name is Cloaked_Cacher, so maybe the cloak is somehow magical?

 

I'd say that in order to log finds that far apart on the same day, regularly, would require an entire agency since a single person wouldn't be able to.

 

Hence my option c.

[+briansnat]

I'd have to view that as a threat and totally inappropriate.

[+Mr Nibbler]

I'd have to view that as a threat and totally inappropriate.

 

Errrrrr, the cacher's log that Maingray quoted I trust and not my post

[+nekom]

"Death to xxxx" is probably almost never a SERIOUS threat, but a threat nonetheless and definately not appropriate.

[+Cache Heads]

When I read the original post, my first thought was "who cares?" However, I do agree that the threat from the quoted log is pretty inappropriate.

 

The OP should report the threat.

 

The OP should also learn from this experience and keep their nose out of others people's business. Confronting questionable cachers for no good reason always opens one up to threats and nastiness... in the end, you can log every cache on Earth in one day and it's not going to effect me in the slightest.

Edited December 13, 2006 by Cache Heads

[Dosido]

Goofy threats aside, why is it so hard to believe that one might be 'catching up' on logs?

 

I could think of several possibilities - perhaps this person has been caching for some time, and finally decided to get a gc.com account, but either didn't remember or didn't care what dates in the past he had actually found the caches, and thus logged them all on the same day.

 

Perhaps the cacher was part of a 'team' under one name, but then split up, and is claiming finds on his/her own account.

 

I've had new cachers along with us while finding caches, and they've gone back and logged the finds once they were hooked and set up their account...

[+sbell111]

Which brings us back to my question:

 

Has anyone actually wandered over to one of the caches and verified whether this guy singed the log? This issue is why caches have log books.

[+briansnat]

Goofy threats aside, why is it so hard to believe that one might be 'catching up' on logs?

 

I could think of several possibilities - perhaps this person has been caching for some time, and finally decided to get a gc.com account, but either didn't remember or didn't care what dates in the past he had actually found the caches, and thus logged them all on the same day.

 

Perhaps the cacher was part of a 'team' under one name, but then split up, and is claiming finds on his/her own account.

 

I've had new cachers along with us while finding caches, and they've gone back and logged the finds once they were hooked and set up their account...

 

It's possible that he is catching up on logs. I see that sometimes, but nearly every time its done the person mentions what he is doing in his logs. Even if he fails to mention what he is doing, a simple explanation when questioned by the cache owner would suffice, rather than a hostile response and death threats. A hostile response usually occurs when someone is caught doing something they know they shouldn't be doing.

Edited December 13, 2006 by briansnat

[+sbell111]

Goofy threats aside, why is it so hard to believe that one might be 'catching up' on logs? ...

It's possible that he is catching up on logs. I see that sometimes, but nearly every time its done the person mentions what he is doing in his logs. ...

Many of the logs do mention this:

Catching up on cache logs. TFTC

Edited December 13, 2006 by sbell111

[+DavidMac]

Which brings us back to my question:

 

Has anyone actually wandered over to one of the caches and verified whether this guy singed the log? This issue is why caches have log books.

 

The cacher in question logged a find on one of my caches. I'll be in the area in a few days and will check it out. If anybody else is able to check their cache logbooks before then, I'd be interested to know what they find. Otherwise I'll wait and see what happens. Sockpuppet or not, I always check the logbook before deleting a log, since even rampant cheaters can have legit finds (I can think of at least one recent example).

[+Renegade Knight]

What you do is report them to Groundspeak. Just in case they are FUBAR. You don't make yourself a target just in case "DEATH TO" is real. You delete their logs on you caches when and if you confirm they are fake. If "DEATH TO" is real...be prepared. Well you should do that anyway just in case.

 

That's about it.

[+beezerb]

June 3 by cloaked_cacher (111 found)

Catching up on cache logs. TFTC

[view this log on a separate page]

 

Time travel always gives me a headache.

[+bluet]

People are checking now but it appears that this person is also known under two other names one of which has already been banned. bluet

[+wesleykey]

I had a cacher who said he could not sign my log as the pencil was broke. Too bad for him, the cache was within 500 feet of my house. That same day I noted the cache was fine and deleted the find.

 

Sometimes faked "find" logs will make cachers waste time thinking a MIA cache is really there. Other than that, I don't care who posts a log to my caches.

[+nekom]

why anybody would want to log caches they haven't been to is beyond me anyway. it's not like you get a prize.

[+emurock]

People are checking now but it appears that this person is also known under two other names one of which has already been banned. bluet

Maybe Cloaked_Cacher is logging all his finds on his banned account.

[+Cache Heads]

why anybody would want to log caches they haven't been to is beyond me anyway. it's not like you get a prize.

Well... no. But you do get a heck of a lot of recongition in the forums!

[+sbell111]

OK, so I got out of the office for a little while and found this cache that 'cloaked cacher logged on 12/9 with 'Catching up on cache logs. TFTC'.

 

There was no 'cloaked cacher' sig in the log. However, the log had been replaced in June. The sigs in the log do match up with the post-June online logs, but it's technically possible that he found the cache prior to June.

[+Renegade Knight]

why anybody would want to log caches they haven't been to is beyond me anyway. it's not like you get a prize.

Well... no. But you do get a heck of a lot of recongition in the forums!

Yup. Soul food for the criminally insane.

[+Sioneva]

I had someone log a find on one of my caches a few days ago, dating it back to July, which was shortly after I placed the cache. I didn't recall seeing his signature in the logbook, so I went out to check, and I couldn't find the cache where I hid it - and I know darn well where it was supposed to be. Paranoia is beginning to emerge. Suspicious log, MIA cache. Hmmm.

 

--- Edited ---

 

Never mind. The log is evidently legit. So what was I babbling about?

Edited December 13, 2006 by Sioneva

[+Lighteye]

I'd have to view that as a threat and totally inappropriate.

Agreed, and furthermore,should be a one way ticket off of the site, IMO. That is a little bit much. Ok, it is WAAAY too far overboard.

[+Confucius' Cat]

I'd have to view that as a threat and totally inappropriate.

Agreed, and furthermore,should be a one way ticket off of the site, IMO. That is a little bit much. Ok, it is WAAAY too far overboard.

Not only a one way ticket off the site but also a visit from the local authorities to the idiot's domicile and a two minute speech starting "you have the right to remain silent..." would be most appropriate.

 

I don't know about others, but no one makes a death threat to me without a report being made.

 

This threat sounds like bs but in today's society there are plenty of nut cases to go around and you can't be sure.

[+cimawr]

Has anyone actually wandered over to one of the caches and verified whether this guy singed the log?

 

Well, depending on how he singed it (matches, perhaps?) he might have burnt off the signature.... or maybe he signed in lemon juice?

 

(Sorry, sbell! I don't usually comment on typos - heaven knows I make enough of 'em myself - but the mental image I got when reading that one was too funny to resist. Especially since it sounds like this guy might be the type to actually do it. )

[+Neos 1]

I'd have to view that as a threat and totally inappropriate.

 

Allow me to add my 2 cents worth. The log I deleted was on a cache that was archived some 7 weeks before this person's profile says he joined. Kind of hard to check a log when the ammo box has been missing for over a month, hence the archive. I e-mailed the cc and asked how he could log a cache 7 weeks before he joined. I got no response so bye-bye log.

 

Interestingly enough this cache was in a rest area that has a micro owned by me and the rest area across the interstate also has a micro owned by me. Both of those were logged on December 9 but the archived cache was logged on September 9, right before it was archived.

I would like to go on record as saying that Death to Neos 1 is a totally inappropriate response since I gave this individual a chance to clarify or at least plead their case.

[+ReadyOrNot]

I just tried to look up the account and it says that it is locked. I guess this is no longer an issue I figured making death threats was against the TOS

[+robert]

Allow me to add my 2 cents worth. The log I deleted was on a cache that was archived some 7 weeks before this person's profile says he joined. Kind of hard to check a log when the ammo box has been missing for over a month, hence the archive. I e-mailed the cc and asked how he could log a cache 7 weeks before he joined. I got no response so bye-bye log.

My SO attended an event with me back in October, but just joined the site the other day. She has yet to backlog her caches, but will do so soon. Even though it will show a join date of December, she will be logging caches from October (she'll use that date, not the date she logs the caches). Her name is in the logbooks (but not under the name she eventually chose), however, so it's a non-issue. Just wanted to point out there is a way someone can log a cache from before their join date--but the online log should make some sort of reference to the reason behind the date discrepancy, but perhaps not everyone thinks it will be an issue when they're doing it.

 

[+Neos 1]

Allow me to add my 2 cents worth. The log I deleted was on a cache that was archived some 7 weeks before this person's profile says he joined. Kind of hard to check a log when the ammo box has been missing for over a month, hence the archive. I e-mailed the cc and asked how he could log a cache 7 weeks before he joined. I got no response so bye-bye log.

My SO attended an event with me back in October, but just joined the site the other day. She has yet to backlog her caches, but will do so soon. Even though it will show a join date of December, she will be logging caches from October (she'll use that date, not the date she logs the caches). Her name is in the logbooks (but not under the name she eventually chose), however, so it's a non-issue. Just wanted to point out there is a way someone can log a cache from before their join date--but the online log should make some sort of reference to the reason behind the date discrepancy, but perhaps not everyone thinks it will be an issue when they're doing it.

 

 

I understand your reasoning which was why I gave the individual an opportunity to explain. I specifically asked about the discrepancy. If your SO or anyone on the level were to receive an email asking why there was a discrepancy, don't you think they would respond in a timely manner instead of logging caches in Europe and posting death threats in their logs there? I checked the person in question's profile and most of the caches were logged on 1 or 2 days except the archived caches which were conveniently logged just prior to the cache being archived in most cases.

[+albsch]

I have read the entries for this topic a couple of times now and some very good information has been provided on handling the entries and working with Groundspeak. It also appears that GS has now locked this persons account. This to my knowledge is about the best they can do. However, as it was pointed out they can create a new account and continue just as before. Renagade Knight hit on a very valid point in that "Death To" is a threat, be it actual or implied. As you live in FL and this person is alledgedly in WV I doubt that they live next door to you, but you never know for sure. I would suggest a call to your local police and discuss the issue with them. As it appears this alledged threat was made electronically over several state boarders this matter could also be a federal issue. If they believe the case has merit they will refer it to the States Attorney for their investigation.

 

Anymore it is very hard to tell who will carry out their threats or are just making statements to move the air. You can read about things like this happening in the papers every day. Will this person carry through on the alledged threat, I doubt it. However, I would not bet my life on it either.

 

Ok, I'll get off my soapbox.

[+DiS02]

Chances are its someone blowing hot air. You could approach the local PD but more than anything they are going to tell you to ignore it as its posted on a website & nothing can be done about it.

 

Why do I say that? I was involved as a mod a few yrs back on a online gaming msg board when a catfight between 2 females overflowed the game & onto freebie personal websites. Short version is.. 1 female put out all kinds of nasty spew about the other, really nasty vile stuff that ended up threatening to kill the named female not only IG but in RL. 'To make her suffer' was the reasoning (shrugs)

I had a fun time getting the sites shut down because as soon as I got one freebie shut down another would appear.

 

I counsilled the threatened female to contact local PD to see what her options were as they both lived in the same state, only about 75 miles apart. The PD told her there was nothing they could do until it was 'brought into RL', as in something on paper, or on a phone/vocal mail.

 

Was not fun & eventually blew over but not without causing a mess of drama IG & out. (shrugs)

 

Good luck, state & area laws do vary & things have changed in the past 2 yrs but dont hope on it.

[+sbell111]

Has anyone actually wandered over to one of the caches and verified whether this guy singed the log?

 

Well, depending on how he singed it (matches, perhaps?) he might have burnt off the signature.... or maybe he signed in lemon juice?

 

(Sorry, sbell! I don't usually comment on typos - heaven knows I make enough of 'em myself - but the mental image I got when reading that one was too funny to resist. Especially since it sounds like this guy might be the type to actually do it. )

Oops, I meant 'sang'.

[+sbell111]

Honetly, I don't know if 'Death to Steve!' would be a threat against my life, or not. Seriously, does it mean that someone intends to kill me, or that they just wish I would croak? Frankly, I doubt that it would be actionable.

 

When I took a look at this person's finds yesterday, I noticed that they kind of looked legit. It looked like road trip geocaching, to me (the two Italy caches notwithstanding, although they could have been old finds with bad dates).

 

I'm also reminded of the other thread from yesterday, in which the finder was simply logging 'got' on many of the old caches. It turned out that he was logging finds that he had made with previously with someone else. That could be the case here, also. I wonder if further analysis would turn up another account that found all those caches.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Is Cloaked_Cacher our old friend Gaits?

[+cimawr]

Oops, I meant 'sang'.

 

Oh THANKS.

Now I've got a mental image of some weirdo standing in the woods with a scrap of paper and singing a list of names like an operatic tenor....

[+Neos 1]

Honetly, I don't know if 'Death to Steve!' would be a threat against my life, or not. Seriously, does it mean that someone intends to kill me, or that they just wish I would croak? Frankly, I doubt that it would be actionable.

 

I agree with this line of reasoning. It sounds like juvenile testosterone bluster to me.

 

When I took a look at this person's finds yesterday, I noticed that they kind of looked legit. It looked like road trip geocaching, to me (the two Italy caches notwithstanding, although they could have been old finds with bad dates).

 

This is also a possibility except for some questionable dates like these 2 that happen to be in the same rest area: GCTKV0 and GCKDYR. Why not show both caches on the same day if the finds were legit?

 

I'm also reminded of the other thread from yesterday, in which the finder was simply logging 'got' on many of the old caches. It turned out that he was logging finds that he had made with previously with someone else. That could be the case here, also. I wonder if further analysis would turn up another account that found all those caches.

 

This was also taken into consideration. Why did the individual not respond to my e-mail asking for an explanation. Had it been something as simple as that I would have said okay and let it go. I know of several people who, for 1 reason or another have started a new account and gone back and relogged all their previous finds under the new name with no trouble and none of them had to post "death to" anyone anywhere.

[nonaeroterraqueous]

I once had an experience where I saw two people actually declare their intentions to kill each other and then go into nearby rooms where they actually had guns, whereby they actually loaded those guns with the thought of actually using them.... puts it in perspective.

 

Some anonymous stranger who has no idea who I am or where I live saying "death to nonaeroterraqueous," would not bother me much. Someone tailgating me on the freeway is another, more imminent, threat.

[+Sioneva]

Oops, I meant 'sang'.

 

Oh THANKS.

Now I've got a mental image of some weirdo standing in the woods with a scrap of paper and singing a list of names like an operatic tenor....

 

*helpless laughter and chair-falling-off antics*

[+cimawr]

I once had an experience where I saw two people actually declare their intentions to kill each other and then go into nearby rooms where they actually had guns, whereby they actually loaded those guns with the thought of actually using them.... puts it in perspective.

 

And did you vacate the vicinity???

 

While I agree that there's a difference between first-hand threatening experiences - I've had a few myself, although none, thank the gods, involving guns other than a threat to return with one** - there HAVE been cases of internet issues leading to real-life injury or death.

For example, there was a case a year or so ago that involved two women who participated in a discussion list about Rat Terriers. One was unbalanced, and problems arose between them on-line. The final result was that the unbalanced one created a fake online identity, posed, through e-mail, as someone interested in buying a puppy, gained entry to the other woman's house, and killed her.

 

**I used to work in retail customer service, and any time you work with the public, you encounter crazy people. I also once got involved - simply by being present & knowing one of them- in an issue involving people physically assaulting each other in public.

Edited December 15, 2006 by cimawr

[+robert]

Oops, I meant 'sang'.

 

Oh THANKS.

Now I've got a mental image of some weirdo standing in the woods with a scrap of paper and singing a list of names like an operatic tenor....

Watch the Jim Carrey version of "How The Grinch Stole Christmas" and you get something very similar to this.