+KRON family Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What to do with troublemaker? We have problem with one of Slovaks, which can not "swallow" that caches in their National Park should be archived. He (we don't know who is it) is creating new nicknames, parodying our nicknames. He is posting NA logs to our caches, with abusive content (for example - "There will be three crosses and you will be in the middle") and copies of discussions about caches in NP - completely unrelated to our caches. It takes about three weeks. Reviewer posted a note (GLDBM09F): "Listing page is not a discussion forum. So please don't use logbook to fight and move your discussion some elsewhere." What happened? Nothing. New NA logs, photos "this is how your grave will look"... After next week, anonymous accounts were banned by lackey. Today, there is new nick parodying me, ANWALD94. There is 25 new NA logs on my caches (and it is not only about my caches, see for example GC4CT8Z with four NA logs! Rebuking did not help, reviewer post did not help, ban from lackeys did not help. So.. What to do? Quote Link to comment
+niraD Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 I'd keep reporting the messages to Groundspeak. They're the only ones who can do anything about it. The more information they have about the troublemaker, the more effectively they can deal with him/her/it. Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Today, there is new nick parodying me, ANWALD94. There is 25 new NA logs on my caches (and it is not only about my caches, see for example GC4CT8Z with four NA logs! It somehow appears that only caches of owners are affected that were involved into a debate, right? Nobody here will understand what the debate has been about. In any case expressions like "idiot Slovak" will not help to stop what's going on. Groundspeak might try to get some information on the ip address of the person opening up new accounts, but if cleverly done, they will fail. Cezanne Quote Link to comment
+The_Incredibles_ Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What about the police? Threatening to kill you is pretty serious stuff. As for the other stuff, keep reporting to Groundspeak. Quote Link to comment
+T.D.M.22 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What about the police? Threatening to kill you is pretty serious stuff. As for the other stuff, keep reporting to Groundspeak. Depends on the police department. I, and a friends had been threatened on Facebook. they outright said "I'll kill her" I knew who it was and the police told me to just block her-like blocking on Facebook would prevent physical content Anyway if the OP's police department is anything like mine was, Groundspeak would be more effective. Although if a reviewer is seeing that more than once, and didn't say anything to Groundspeak, I'd complain about the reviewer as well. Quote Link to comment
+Harry Dolphin Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 If the offender keeps using the same IP address, that can be blocked by Groundspeak. Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 What to do with troublemaker? We have problem with one of Slovaks, which can not "swallow" that caches in their National Park should be archived. He (we don't know who is it) is creating new nicknames, parodying our nicknames. He is posting NA logs to our caches, with abusive content (for example - "There will be three crosses and you will be in the middle") and copies of discussions about caches in NP - completely unrelated to our caches. It takes about three weeks. Reviewer posted a note (GLDBM09F): "Listing page is not a discussion forum. So please don't use logbook to fight and move your discussion some elsewhere." What happened? Nothing. New NA logs, photos "this is how your grave will look"... After next week, anonymous accounts were banned by lackey. Today, there is new nick parodying me, ANWALD94. There is 25 new NA logs on my caches (and it is not only about my caches, see for example GC4CT8Z with four NA logs! Rebuking did not help, reviewer post did not help, ban from lackeys did not help. So.. What to do? How exactly did this start? Was there an official policy put forth banning caches from National parks there, or did they receive NAs on their hides by other cachers who feel they (as you say), "should be archived"? Quote Link to comment
Luckless Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 My first thought was to contact the police. Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) Today, there is new nick parodying me, ANWALD94. There is 25 new NA logs on my caches (and it is not only about my caches, see for example GC4CT8Z with four NA logs! It somehow appears that only caches of owners are affected that were involved into a debate, right? Nobody here will understand what the debate has been about. In any case expressions like "idiot Slovak" will not help to stop what's going on. Groundspeak might try to get some information on the ip address of the person opening up new accounts, but if cleverly done, they will fail. Cezanne Ah, drama is everywhere, isn't it? There are actually still people who think it's only like in my area, and doesn't happen everywhere else in the world where Geocaching is popular. There are most likely anonymous proxy's going on here, I doubt anyone is stupid enough to think they wouldn't get busted for creating all these accounts from a static IP address associated with their player account. (I could be wrong though, they could be clueless). We only have one side of the story here though. I think it's quite possible the OP could be an original troublemaker, and is experiencing retaliation. I'm aware of a few cases where Groundspeak has matched IP addresses of Sock Puppets to player accounts. Most recently the banned militant armchair TB logger with DGS persona account, and a 6,000 find "real" player account. Edited February 28, 2014 by Mr.Yuck Quote Link to comment
+Crow-T-Robot Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 What to do with troublemaker? We have problem with one of Slovaks, which can not "swallow" that caches in their National Park should be archived. He (we don't know who is it) is creating new nicknames, parodying our nicknames. He is posting NA logs to our caches, with abusive content (for example - "There will be three crosses and you will be in the middle") and copies of discussions about caches in NP - completely unrelated to our caches. It takes about three weeks. Reviewer posted a note (GLDBM09F): "Listing page is not a discussion forum. So please don't use logbook to fight and move your discussion some elsewhere." What happened? Nothing. New NA logs, photos "this is how your grave will look"... After next week, anonymous accounts were banned by lackey. Today, there is new nick parodying me, ANWALD94. There is 25 new NA logs on my caches (and it is not only about my caches, see for example GC4CT8Z with four NA logs! Rebuking did not help, reviewer post did not help, ban from lackeys did not help. So.. What to do? Ignore them. They're doing it for attention and you're giving them what they want. If you stop paying attention to them, they'll get bored and quit. Quote Link to comment
4wheelin_fool Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 "this is how your grave will look"... Threats and harassment are a police matter. Do not respond to it at all, or delete it. Quote Link to comment
+jellis Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 What to do with troublemaker? We have problem with one of Slovaks, which can not "swallow" that caches in their National Park should be archived. He (we don't know who is it) is creating new nicknames, parodying our nicknames. He is posting NA logs to our caches, with abusive content (for example - "There will be three crosses and you will be in the middle") and copies of discussions about caches in NP - completely unrelated to our caches. It takes about three weeks. Reviewer posted a note (GLDBM09F): "Listing page is not a discussion forum. So please don't use logbook to fight and move your discussion some elsewhere." What happened? Nothing. New NA logs, photos "this is how your grave will look"... After next week, anonymous accounts were banned by lackey. Today, there is new nick parodying me, ANWALD94. There is 25 new NA logs on my caches (and it is not only about my caches, see for example GC4CT8Z with four NA logs! Rebuking did not help, reviewer post did not help, ban from lackeys did not help. So.. What to do? Ignore them. They're doing it for attention and you're giving them what they want. If you stop paying attention to them, they'll get bored and quit. Do all of above. Keep reporting them, Contact police, and don't repond to their posts or emails. Even if they get deleted by you or the troublemakers, GS has record of their posts and emails (except any you had responded to by your personal email)Plus if you talk to the reviewer and explained he/she may just ignore the NA messages. If you ignore them maybe they will get tired and stop. Have they done anything to your caches yet? Quote Link to comment
+KRON family Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 How exactly did this start? Was there an official policy put forth banning caches from National parks there, or did they receive NAs on their hides by other cachers who feel they (as you say), "should be archived"? There is no official prohibition of geocaching in NP, just no entry distance of five(?) meters from the road under penalty. So yes, some Slovaks received NAs on their hides in NP by one player. Ignore them. They're doing it for attention and you're giving them what they want. If you stop paying attention to them, they'll get bored and quit. Currently I'm trying to ignore it. Because if someone tries to delete these logs, he typically within one hour receiv new logs. Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) How exactly did this start? Was there an official policy put forth banning caches from National parks there, or did they receive NAs on their hides by other cachers who feel they (as you say), "should be archived"? There is no official prohibition of geocaching in NP, just no entry distance of five(?) meters from the road under penalty. So yes, some Slovaks received NAs on their hides in NP by one player. Did this player come from the Czech republic? I guess there is something about your involvement in the debate that you did not tell us here. There certainly is a reason why the other person is using the account names .....94 that make reference to you. Do you think that expressions like "idiot Slovak" are ok? It appears to me that something went already bad in the dabates that took place before the NA logs of this person. Also the reply from the reviewer makes me believe that something personal must have happened and there is more behind than what you tell us. It makes me feel that a certain level of aggression has been used also from your side and others around you before this unfortunate situation started. The police certainly will not be able to help unless the person is known which is not the case. Cezanne Edited February 28, 2014 by cezanne Quote Link to comment
+KRON family Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) Did this player come from the Czech republic? Yes, this player also comes from Czech republic. I guess there is something about your involvement in the debate that you did not tell us here. There certainly is a reason why the other person is using the account names .....94 that make reference to you. Do you think that expressions like "idiot Slovak" are ok? It appears to me that something went already bad in the dabates that took place before the NA logs of this person. Also the reply from the reviewer makes me believe that something personal must have happened and there is more behind than what you tell us. It makes me feel that a certain level of aggression has been used also from your side and others around you before this unfortunate situation started. Yes. After first "set" of NA logs were this logs in Slovak language also on one cache in Poland. So I wrote WN to reviewer, if he can ignore these NA logs from <removed> from Slovakia. I dont know how is it in your language, but word "blbeček" (translated via Google translator) is really not vulgar. Edited February 28, 2014 by Cascade Reviewer Removed potty language Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Did this player come from the Czech republic? Yes, this player also comes from Czech republic. Are you this player from the Czech Republic? Probably not, but are you good friends with them? Were you with them on the cache outing that inpsired them to post the NA's? How many cache owners are receiving these NA's? Quote Link to comment
+KRON family Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) Are you this player from the Czech Republic? Probably not, but are you good friends with them? Were you with them on the cache outing that inpsired them to post the NA's? How many cache owners are receiving these NA's? No, I'm not this player. I never contact him before this affair and I never met him. I don't know how many cache owners are receiving these NA's, probably just me and he*. * - Which NA logs? NA logs with abusive content or NA logs in NP? Edited February 28, 2014 by Tiskar94 Quote Link to comment
+Adventure.AS Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 What to do with troublemaker? Rebuking did not help, reviewer post did not help, ban from lackeys did not help. So.. What to do? Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Quote Link to comment
+BCandMsKitty Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Rebuking did not help, reviewer post did not help, ban from lackeys did not help. So.. What to do? As annoying as it surely is, just keep deleting the logs and ignore the rest. They'll get tired of it when they see there is no reaction from you. If personal threats keep coming, report it to the police. They might not be able to help much, but it will be a matter of record. Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 What to do with troublemaker? Rebuking did not help, reviewer post did not help, ban from lackeys did not help. So.. What to do? Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Well, he'd indeed have the audit, which may not be a bad idea. - But no one has ever needed a PM to log pmo hides. Quote Link to comment
+TheHarleyRebel Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Is it not possible for Groundspeak to block his IP address? Quote Link to comment
+KRON family Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Your idea is great, but I am not premium member. Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 What to do with troublemaker? Rebuking did not help, reviewer post did not help, ban from lackeys did not help. So.. What to do? Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. NA logs and any other logs can be logged from a BM account. A cache can be logged without appearing in the audit log. Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Is it not possible for Groundspeak to block his IP address? If this person uses the same IP address all the time and does not use any approaches for anonymising, then the answer is yes. Quote Link to comment
cezanne Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 (edited) Yes. After first "set" of NA logs were this logs in Slovak language also on one cache in Poland. So I wrote WN to reviewer, if he can ignore these NA logs from <removed> from Slovakia. I dont know how is it in your language, but word "blbeček" (translated via Google translator) is really not vulgar. In any case this is unfriendly language and I know people who got warned by Groundspeak for more harmless formulations. I think that using such expressions just adds to the problem. I wonder at which language level the forum discussions and exchanged mails on the topic took place. The fact that a Czech cacher posted NA logs for caches in Slovakia does not make things easier and in such cases it is even more important not to use language that is insulting. Cezanne Edited February 28, 2014 by Cascade Reviewer Removed potty language from quote Quote Link to comment
Mr.Yuck Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Is it not possible for Groundspeak to block his IP address? If this person uses the same IP address all the time and does not use any approaches for anonymising, then the answer is yes. One of many anonymizer's out there. Love their logo, by the way. Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Is it not possible for Groundspeak to block his IP address? If this person uses the same IP address all the time and does not use any approaches for anonymising, then the answer is yes. One of many anonymizer's out there. Love their logo, by the way. Hey, thanks for that ! Ummm... not that I'd do anything with it... Quote Link to comment
+cerberus1 Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Yes. After first "set" of NA logs were this logs in Slovak language also on one cache in Poland. So I wrote WN to reviewer, if he can ignore these NA logs from <removed> from Slovakia. I dont know how is it in your language, but word "blbeček" (translated via Google translator) is really not vulgar. In any case this is unfriendly language and I know people who got warned by Groundspeak for more harmless formulations. I think that using such expressions just adds to the problem. I wonder at which language level the forum discussions and exchanged mails on the topic took place. The fact that a Czech cacher posted NA logs for caches in Slovakia does not make things easier and in such cases it is even more important not to use language that is insulting. Cezanne Agreed. I realize the OP is frustrated by this, but abusive or insulting lanquage to another may well be what's responsible for his (the "troublemaker's") behavior. - A simple word called him here was removed... Quote Link to comment
+The_Incredibles_ Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Your idea is great, but I am not premium member. You're having these serious problems and you are not willing to cough up $10 to see if it will help? Quote Link to comment
4wheelin_fool Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Your idea is great, but I am not premium member. You're having these serious problems and you are not willing to cough up $10 to see if it will help? So then they can log every one through the back door? Every cache has an audit log visible to Groundspeak, and they probably have a good idea who it is. Quote Link to comment
+TheWeatherWarrior Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Your idea is great, but I am not premium member. You're having these serious problems and you are not willing to cough up $10 to see if it will help? Spending money is the answer to everything. BTW, do you get a commission because seems like this is your answer to everything (though see a lot of others say the same). Premium membership solves nothing as far as problems go. So many work arounds to PMO caches. Quote Link to comment
+The_Incredibles_ Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Your idea is great, but I am not premium member. You're having these serious problems and you are not willing to cough up $10 to see if it will help? So then they can log every one through the back door? Every cache has an audit log visible to Groundspeak, and they probably have a good idea who it is. Yes, they could, but it would make it harder for them. Just saying, if it was me with the problem, I would want to try everything. Quote Link to comment
+BAMBOOZLE Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Your idea is great, but I am not premium member. You're having these serious problems and you are not willing to cough up $10 to see if it will help? Amen. Making all my caches PMO has solved the vast majority of my problems. Quote Link to comment
4wheelin_fool Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Your idea is great, but I am not premium member. You're having these serious problems and you are not willing to cough up $10 to see if it will help? So then they can log every one through the back door? Every cache has an audit log visible to Groundspeak, and they probably have a good idea who it is. Yes, they could, but it would make it harder for them. Just saying, if it was me with the problem, I would want to try everything. That was my first thought also, but it would only encourage them to overcome it by going the other route. Then they wouldnt show up on Groundspeak's audit log anymore. If he was already a member it may be worth a try, but advising him to join just for that would likely come off as cheesy. People should not have to consider being a paid member to avoid harassment, and especially when the method may not stop it. Quote Link to comment
+Manville Possum Posted March 2, 2014 Share Posted March 2, 2014 Have you considered making all of your caches Premium Member Only? You would have an audit log and your 'trouble maker' would need a PM account to log them. Your idea is great, but I am not premium member. You're having these serious problems and you are not willing to cough up $10 to see if it will help? Amen. Making all my caches PMO has solved the vast majority of my problems. Yep. Same here. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.