Dnf But Asks Cache Owner For Find

[+OzGuff]

(I am sure that this topic has been thrashed to death but am too lazy to dredge up previous threads.)

 

What do folks think of the practice of not finding the cache but then asking the cache owner for permission to log it as a find? Let us also assume that the cache is highly likely to be missing, and that the DNF-er has verified that the cache is probably not there.

 

My slant is that you didn't find the cache and you didn't sign the logbook; sounds like a DNF to me. But I have bumped into a couple of high-number cachers who claim that it is about the search/journey so why not claim a find. (That sounds like justification for getting another find -- if it really was just about the search/journey then why worry if you get a find or not?) I have also heard folks say that they are unlikely to get back to the area so want "credit" for getting to the posted coordinates. With that logic I have a whole bunch of DNFs that I should change into finds.

 

I know that the cache owner can do whatever they want but it still doesn't seem quite kosher to me.

 

So there you have it -- a question and my thoughts. I await your learned responses...

Edited September 29, 2005 by OzGuff

[+M4T]

I guess this seems pretty simple to me...if you found it, it's a find.

 

If you didn't find it, it's a DNF.

 

Example - I went for a 1/1 with my 3yr old son...a simple hunt on a well traveled path. Got attacked by bees on the way...consequently DID NOT FIND IT...logged it as a DNF. I don't know, maybe I am more honest than some people or something...I hope not.

 

Do people really want to "cheat" at this game? Seriously?

[+yorelken]

I have always thought you have to find the cache and sign the log book for a regular cache. I don't think going to the general area cuts it. How close do you have to get - within a hundred yards, a mile, the same county? That's why the log book is there.

[CoyoteRed]

My slant is that you didn't find the cache and you didn't sign the logbook; sounds like a DNF to me.

That's it. End of story.

 

As for the rest, I guess some folks need a smiley to let themselves know they had a good time.

[+briansnat]

What do folks think of the practice of not finding the cache but then asking the cache owner for permission to log it as a find?

 

Its beyond silly, but it does happen. Its usually with the high numbers cachers. I guess that is how they got their high numbers.

 

Do people really want to "cheat" at this game? Seriously?

 

More than you can imagine.

Edited September 29, 2005 by briansnat

[+Allen_L]

I had my first missing geocache back in 2001. The hunt required a multiple mile hike and I hadn't done one in at least a decade. My son was with me and we looked and looked, we broke out the hint and looked again and couldn't find it. I took a picture of where the hint pointed to and verified that it looked just like the picture another cacher had taken, well except for the fact his picture had an ammo box in it. We talked about it and the effort of the hunt, but decided that we couldn't say we found something that wasn't there. We have used that criteria ever since.

 

But on the other hand I don't really care what other people consider a find. However as I have stated in many places I do reserve the right to snicker at someone whose find log reads something similar to "I didn't find the geocache, but I did find where it was."

[Tahosa and Sons]

If a cacher looks for one of mine and comes across a recently muggled cache and lets me know its gone, after a field verification that it is indeed gone. I will allow them the option to log it because they were kind enough to let me know there was a problem with the cache.

[+JoGPS]

I don’t ever recall asking a cache owner to log a cache just for smiley that was not there, and resent that some think that because someone has gone out and found a lot of caches that they are cheaters. This is not always the case.

 

If I go out and do not find a cache that I believe is not there after spending three times the amount of time it would normally take to find it, and the cache owner replies that it was missing, that was no fought of my own, but poor cache maintenance I should log it anyway, but don’t recall doing that either, but can see why some would, they were there and cache was not.

 

Found one of the OzGuff caches a few months back and did not log it as a find even though I did sign the log and the cache was in good shape but was on private property because the owners told me no one have permission to hide one there. But did not even log that because he would start a topic on cache police like he has done in the past about different things like on copy and paste logs and a number of other things about high number cachers that seem to tick him off

 

Back on topic, Play the game the way you want to if the cache owner is in agreement go for , like who cares except the busy bodies.

 

If anyone would like to go look at all of my logs to see if I have done this more power to you.

 

I am just ducky swimming around in the big old pond of life and having a blast playing the game the way I want to not because some else thinks its not proper, this is suppose to be a light and fun sport and it is for me.

 

Joe

[CoyoteRed]

However as I have stated in many places I do reserve the right to snicker at someone whose find log reads something similar to "I didn't find the geocache, but I did find where it was."

 

Hey, I know. Let's break out all of the archived caches and go visit where a cache used to be! w00t!

[WH]

Whether I agree with it or not, a cache owner is the supreme ruler of his or her listing. If they want to allow non-finder's to log a find, its up to them.

Edited September 29, 2005 by WH

[CoyoteRed]

I don’t ever recall asking a cache owner to log a cache just for smiley that was not there, and resent that some think that because someone has gone out and found a lot of caches that they are cheaters. This is not always the case.

I don't think he's saying all high number cachers are cheaters. What I got out of it, and I have to agree with it as it's been my experience as well, that the majority of the those who want to claim a find even though they didn't find the cache are those with high numbers.

 

Like I said, the only time that I've gotten logs with such claims on our caches are those with higher numbers. For where ever reason that is, it just is.

[+BlkFt]

Just reading along here, and a question popped into my mind...

What do you think of team players who sign logs for everyone on the team, even if the others are not there? Or sign players names to logs before they go out to there eventual cache spot? I think that team play is good, but, shouldn't the team be together hunting the cache?

[+Mule Ears]

Upgrading a DNF to a is entirely up to the cache owner. So, cache owner, why not use your discretion to set up a positive incentive? If the DNFer discovered that the cache has gone missing, then allow him to change that DNF to a find once you've verified it (by replacing the cache). After all, that DNF log is valuable to you in that it tells you that the cache is missing. And the DNF is no fault of the seeker--he didn't find it because it wasn't there.

 

If it's an ordinary DNF (one in which the cache was there, but the cacher did not find it), then there's no reason to change it to a smiley. Doesn't matter how far someone walked, climbed, drove, swam, biked, etc. -- if they failed to find the cache and sign the log, it's a DNF (unless you, the owner, see a reason to rule otherwise).

 

The general reluctance to log DNFs has been a recurrent topic in the forums. Offering a possible smiley as an incentive to encourage folks to report DNFs seems like a positive tweak to the game.

[+briansnat]

I don’t ever recall asking a cache owner to log a cache just for smiley that was not there, and resent that some think that because someone has gone out and found a lot of caches that they are cheaters. This is not always the case

 

I don't think I said all high number cachers are cheaters. I know many, probably most, are totally honest. I do know of quite a few though whose idea of what constitutes a find doesn't always include finding a cache.

[+geognerd]

Upgrading a DNF to a is entirely up to the cache owner. So, cache owner, why not use your discretion to set up a positive incentive? If the DNFer discovered that the cache has gone missing, then allow him to change that DNF to a find once you've verified it (by replacing the cache). After all, that DNF log is valuable to you in that it tells you that the cache is missing. And the DNF is no fault of the seeker--he didn't find it because it wasn't there.

 

If it's an ordinary DNF (one in which the cache was there, but the cacher did not find it), then there's no reason to change it to a smiley. Doesn't matter how far someone walked, climbed, drove, swam, biked, etc. -- if they failed to find the cache and sign the log, it's a DNF (unless you, the owner, see a reason to rule otherwise).

 

The general reluctance to log DNFs has been a recurrent topic in the forums. Offering a possible smiley as an incentive to encourage folks to report DNFs seems like a positive tweak to the game.

Mule Ears hit the nail on the head. I have never asked for permission to log a cache I DNFed as a find. I have however been fortunate enough to be allowed to log a find after I reported what appeared to be the remnants of the cache to the owner. Another unique situation where I was able to change a DNF to a find was when there was a malfunction with the cache container's hiding place, which prevented most cachers from retrieving the cache. I found the hiding place, just couldn't physically get the cache and mentioned this in a message to the owner. I did write in my Found It log entry that the next time I am in the area (I don't regularly cache in that town), I will try to retrieve the cache again and sign the log.

[CoyoteRed]

Offering a possible smiley as an incentive to encourage folks to report DNFs seems like a positive tweak to the game.

I couldn't disagree more--respectfully, of course.

 

Smilies aren't a "reward." Nor should it be. Granted, many people turn it into one, but that is symptom of competitiveness.

 

I'm a firm believer in simple rules. You find the cache and sign the log, it's a find. If you did not find a cache regardless of the reason, it's something other than a find. (Many cases a DNF, sometimes a note, sometimes no log at all.)

[+JohnnyVegas]

I had a high number cacher in my area post a DNF on one if mine, he said he found part of the cache, I was in the area a few days later and found just the lid, So I replaced that cache and put his name in the log and told him to log the find.

 

I had another cacher not find the cache, they dicided it must be gone so they loged it as a find, it was not missing, they were just lazy so I deleted their log.

[+Mule Ears]

The beauty of this is that we're not talking about a rule. It's an option for a cache owner who wants to reward someone who discovers that a cache is missing or vandalized beyond the possibility of signing the log. And, like it or not, many/most cachers do view the smiley as the currency (think Monopoly money) of this game. So offering an incentive in play money for rendering a valuable service may be a smart thing to do, provided it doesn't conflict with some personal code of ethics.

 

It's like this--you find a wallet on the street. As an honest person, it's your moral duty to either return it to the owner or take it to the authorities for return to the owner. You may do so with no expectation of a reward. But the fact that people sometimes do receive a reward for doing the right thing increases the chances that a given person will do the right thing.

 

Naturally, as the owner of the lost wallet, you can thank the finder, give him twenty bucks, or just turn on your heel and go. But I'm glad that at least some folks choose the first two options.

[+JohnnyVegas]

Offering a possible smiley as an incentive to encourage folks to report DNFs seems like a positive tweak to the game.

 

What, more PC nonsence.

[+Allen_L]

And the DNF is no fault of the seeker--he didn't find it because it wasn't there.

No it isn't their fault they didn't find it, but they didn't find it. To me a dnf is a dnf, it doesn't matter if it is my fault (I just didn't find it), the hiders fault (he gave bad coord), or a third party's fault (someone took it). So that how I enter my logs. It is your choice how you enter yours.

[+Mule Ears]

What, more PC nonsence.

 

How so? It's more of an incentive-based approach to getting people to act the way you want them to. Any alignment between my opinions and political correctness would be viewed as a sign of the Apocalypse.

[+Deermark]

It seems that the only people that complain about high number cachers is low number cachers. Quit griping and go caching. JoGPS hit the nail squarely on the head in all his points.

[+geognerd]

I bet most DNFs are a problem with the cacher, and not a problem with the cache. I think it's OK if a cache owner allows a cacher to change their DNF or note to a find if they deem the circumstances acceptable. If the cacher doesn't feel deserving of the find, there's nothing saying they have to take up the cache owner's offer. What's unacceptable is if a cacher logs a find to begin with when they haven't found anything. Following the logic of my opening sentence, people shouldn't assume a cache is missing if they can't find it. It irks me to read DNF logs when someone says "It must be missing." But at least they logged it as a DNF. I think we are re-hashing other topics here, with the discussion of logging all DNFs, how people want to play the game, and how the cache owners do their maintenance.

[CoyoteRed]

It's an option for a cache owner who wants to reward someone who discovers that a cache is missing or vandalized beyond the possibility of signing the log.

First, if the cacher didn't find the cache, how does he know it is missing?

 

Second, if the cacher found the cache, even if it's destroyed, then he found the cache. He could gather it all up, put a slip of paper in there with his name, and claim the find; because that's what it is, a find.

 

No, placing value on smilies causes problems. We wouldn't even be having this conversation if there wasn't a value on a smilie beyond the fact that it says you found the cache. That is all it should signify.

[+StarBrand]

I have no problem with people logging a find on my caches when I can verify it is gone. No fault of the seeker that it was muggled. Several have emailed photos of cache remnants or of the spot where the cache once rested. Good faith effort to find and log but it just wasn't possible. Many, if not most, of those cachers later visited the replaced cache anyway.

 

We have all seen the argument that we can't claim a find on a cache of our own because we "know" where it is. I agree with this. However, If a cacher clearly offers evidence of having been to the spot of a muggled cache, many of you argue it is not a find. I guess, by your own logic, there is no way of re-visiting that spot for them to claim a find after it is replaced??

 

Muggled caches are hardly the fault of seekers - I just ask for some evidence that they really got to the spot. just my 2 cents worth....

[CoyoteRed]

Quit griping and go caching.

In other words, "I'm a high numbers cacher, so I know what I'm talking about and you low number cachers don't so you don't have a voice, so now shut up."

 

I'll repeat: the only cacher who claimed a find on a cache, but didn't find it and the cache was still there was someone well into the 4 digits--someone you have no hope in catching. I don't care who you are or how many finds you've logged, you log a find on a cache of ours and didn't actually find it, you will be asked to change it or have your log deleted. Period.

[+Moose Mob]

My smileys are my way of keeping track, not keeping score. In a nutshell, it really doesn't matter.

 

I'm still having fun. Are you?

[+wimseyguy]

Following the logic of my opening sentence, people shouldn't assume a cache is missing if they can't find it. It irks me to read DNF logs when someone says "It must be missing." But at least they logged it as a DNF.

Around here that tune goes " I have found umpteen thousand caches in xx states and countries, so it must be missing.

On a somewhat related tangent- I needed to phone a friend to the owner to find one the other day-do I only get rewarded with half a smiley?

Then again if it all about the experience-we both got to laugh at my incompetence and his skills, so maybe I do get the full smiley.

 

What was the question again.....

[+geognerd]

It's an option for a cache owner who wants to reward someone who discovers that a cache is missing or vandalized beyond the possibility of signing the log.

First, if the cacher didn't find the cache, how does he know it is missing?

 

Second, if the cacher found the cache, even if it's destroyed, then he found the cache. He could gather it all up, put a slip of paper in there with his name, and claim the find; because that's what it is, a find.

That's why only a person who finds part of the cache should receive the "reward" of a smiley. A single DNF log is worthless to a cache owner unless it specifically mentions something the owner recognizes as part of a cache. If I see a DNF for one of my caches that says "Searched 30 mins, couldn't find it" I don't see any reason to run out and check the cache if it's there. That DNF log was useless. 2 DNFs in a row, OK, that's something to investigate. So yeah, I'd let someone log a find who found part of a cache cuz it shows they were there and found the cache (albeit in poor condition). As for my scenario where one of my DNFs turned into a find, it was a puzzle cache. I went through and solved the puzzle, only to find the velcro that once held the cache in place. So heck yeah, I want my smiley. I did the puzzle, I went to the cache location, and I found part of the cache. I did everything right.

[+Team Perks]

No, placing value on smilies causes problems. We wouldn't even be having this conversation if there wasn't a value on a smilie beyond the fact that it says you found the cache. That is all it should signify.

Well said. Thus, a lot of smilies means you found a lot of caches. Which means you have more time, money, and ambition than I do. No skin off my back. I still get to have fun!

 

What constitutes a find is really up to the cache owner and the cache "finder" to determine. In my book, if the cache really truly isn't there, it isn't a find because (gasp!) the cache isn't I've logged a couple of finds in the past that I probably wouldn't log as a find now. Oh well...live and learn, I guess.

[+JohnnyVegas]

What, more PC nonsence.

 

How so? It's more of an incentive-based approach to getting people to act the way you want them to. Any alignment between my opinions and political correctness would be viewed as a sign of the Apocalypse.

Because they are being awared for not completing a task, This would be like an employer giving an employee that is not doing a good job an award for job performance using the logic that it will make them feel good about them selves (I have seen this done). It just does not work.

[+OzGuff]

However as I have stated in many places I do reserve the right to snicker at someone whose find log reads something similar to "I didn't find the geocache, but I did find where it was."

I laughed out loud at your "snicker" line! I believe I will now always recall that line when reading someone's DNF = Found log. Thanks!!

[+Mule Ears]

No, placing value on smilies causes problems.

 

Each cache owner is entitled to run his caches as he sees fit. Some complain that not enough cachers post DNFs when they fail to find a cache. A DNF log is obviously valuable feedback to the cache owner. I'm saying that a cache owner might want to use his discretion in a narrowly defined circumstance--one in which the seeker says the cache is missing and the owner confirms it--to reward the seeker. Or not.

 

Besides, doesn't an insistence on withholding the smiley imply that the smiley has greater-than-zero value? Ask me for the time, I might give it to you. Ask me for a hundred-dollar bill, I probably will not.

 

The fact that smilies have acquired a value can be ignored, denied, decried, or used to positive advantage. Just like money, status, connections, good looks, personality, etc. I'm looking for the positive, and I find no downside to a transaction that leaves both the cacher and owner happier and better off.

[+Polar B's]

I Have always wanted to ask this question and this seems like a good place...

 

If you go a search for a cache and don't find it, however keep coming back and looking for say on other days, should you log a DNF for each time? or just when you done searching for that cache, ie given up?

 

By the way just to keep on topic a little, I don't believe that you can log a find without actually finding the cache and signing log.

[+Mule Ears]

Because they are being awared for not completing a task, This would be like an employer giving an employee that is not doing a good job an award for job performance using the logic that it will make them feel good about them selves (I have seen this done). It just does not work.

 

Scenario: You are a machinist. You arrive at work and your lathe is broken. Employer docks you a day's pay.

[+sept1c_tank]

I would never ask for, or accept a false find, but if the guy asked me about one of my own caches, I'd give it to him. It would probably really make his day.

 

Besides, who cares?

[+Deermark]

Quit griping and go caching.

In other words, "I'm a high numbers cacher, so I know what I'm talking about and you low number cachers don't so you don't have a voice, so now shut up."

 

I'll repeat: the only cacher who claimed a find on a cache, but didn't find it and the cache was still there was someone well into the 4 digits--someone you have no hope in catching. I don't care who you are or how many finds you've logged, you log a find on a cache of ours and didn't actually find it, you will be asked to change it or have your log deleted. Period.

Hey Coyote. How did you get all the meaning out of my 5 words? Just go and have fun.

[+Mule Ears]

Second, if the cacher found the cache, even if it's destroyed, then he found the cache. He could gather it all up, put a slip of paper in there with his name, and claim the find; because that's what it is, a find.

 

Slippery slope. It's "sign the log" not "sign a slip of paper I had on me and bundle it with some nearby litter." If a cacher cannot determine when a cache is gone or destroyed, then he certainly cannot identify a debris field as the remains of a cache. I'm not actually disagreeing with you so much as pointing out that you do see the need for occasional discretion.

[+budd-rdc]

However as I have stated in many places I do reserve the right to snicker at someone whose find log reads something similar to "I didn't find the geocache, but I did find where it was."

 

Hey, I know. Let's break out all of the archived caches and go visit where a cache used to be! w00t!

I've done that, and actually found the container with the log book, and posted a "LTF" (Last To Find) since the approver already archived it, and the owner is no longer active in Geocaching.

 

I've gone to caches and posted DNFs and followed up with details of my search of where I thought they used to be. Some owners are satisfied with the explanation and will allow a "find" probably as a thanks for providing maintenance info. I've yet to accept any of the offers, but I have no problems if others accept them. It's another thing if finders make a habit out of this.

 

Advice for smiley addicts: If you have a camera handy, it never hurts to take photos of the area whenever there's DNF.

Edited September 29, 2005 by budd-rdc

[+Miragee]

I Have always wanted to ask this question and this seems like a good place...

 

If you go a search for a cache and don't find it, however keep coming back and looking for say on other days, should you log a DNF for each time? or just when you done searching for that cache, ie given up? . . .

People who use GSAK can see a pictorial representation of the last four logs. If you log consecutive DNFs, there will be two, three, or four little red squares that will discourage other cachers from going to that cache.

 

Of course, cachers should actually read the cache page before deciding against a search.

 

(Emphasis on should.)

 

If you have had consecutive DNFs with no finds by anyone else, maybe the thing to do would be to edit the DNF with the new date, and add to your original log. Otherwise, I would log all your DNFs. Sometimes those are the most interesting logs . . .

 

Back on topic, sort of. I went to a cache location and looked and looked for the cache for 30 minutes. At that site, I gained an appreciation for the thing the cache owner wanted cachers to see.

 

When I logged the DNF, I found out the cache had gone missing and had been disabled that morning.

 

The cache owner has told me to log it as a find since I saw what he wanted me to see . . .

 

I'm still debating about doing that . . .

[+OzGuff]

This is the second time I have drawn the wrath of JoGPS. At least this time I didn't mention him by name...

 

I am pretty sure that neither briansnat nor I implicated ALL high-number cachers. I do agree, however, with CoyoteRed that many of the times I have seen this situation occur it has been a high-number cacher.

 

I also agree that the final arbiter is the cache owner -- if they allow a find, so be it.

 

It is interesting to note that JoGPS apparently thinks I have something against high-number cachers. With over 1,900 finds I must almost fit the definition. But I don't have anything against high-number cachers. It is some of the actions of some of the high-number cachers with which I don't agree. I do agree with JoGPS that cachers should play the game as they see fit. I asked a question to see what the prevailing sentiment might be; I was not passing judgment. (OK, so maybe just a little..)

 

Deermark said,

It seems that the only people that complain about high number cachers is low number cachers.

I wasn't complaining, but asking for the opinions of the assembled masses. My almost 2,000 finds versus your over 5,000 finds may mean we are in different leagues, but I sign the logs to get my finds. (Not that am saying you don't.) (Sign the logs, that is.)

 

I recently had the good fortune to travel through Nashville, finding 130+ in 16 hours. I also had a decent number of DNFs. I was amazed at the number of emails I received from cache owners letting me know that a particular cache was missing, and that I should go ahead and claim a find. I thanked them for their offers and declined. I didn't sign the logs.

 

Why is it that when a question about the credibility and/or validity of a find (or finds) is posed in the forums the most vitriolic responders tend to be high-number cachers? Do you think the questions hit a little too close to home?

 

I enjoy my caching experiences. I am sure high-number cachers enjoy their experiences. I'll just go back to being a busy body. (I forgot to thank JoGPS for going off topic to specifically slam me a few times.)

 

Aren't the forums fun? (This is a rhetorical question and needs no response.)

Edited September 29, 2005 by OzGuff

[CoyoteRed]

Second, if the cacher found the cache, even if it's destroyed, then he found the cache. He could gather it all up, put a slip of paper in there with his name, and claim the find; because that's what it is, a find.

 

Slippery slope. It's "sign the log" not "sign a slip of paper I had on me and bundle it with some nearby litter." If a cacher cannot determine when a cache is gone or destroyed, then he certainly cannot identify a debris field as the remains of a cache. I'm not actually disagreeing with you so much as pointing out that you do see the need for occasional discretion.

Agreed. We found one once that every piece of contents was wet, every bag had a hole in it, it was strewn around over a fairly wide area, but we found the logbook. We gathered everything up, signed the log best we could (using a stamp helps in these instances), taped it shut. We ended up posting a find and an SBA if I remember correctly. (It was a while back.)

 

I'm not disagreeing with owners having discretion, but using smilies as a reward for anything other that its intended purpose is a steeper slippery slope. IMHO, anyway.

[+Mule Ears]

I would never ask for, or accept a false find, but if the guy asked me about one of my own caches, I'd give it to him. It would probably really make his day.

 

That's the circumstance that inspired me to jump into this discussion. On the hunt for this cache, we found the likely hiding spot with no cache, but a jug of water. Posted a DNF with a photo and our findings. The cache owner acknowledged that we'd found the spot, but the cache had been muggled. We changed the DNF to a note.

 

In later correspondence with the cache owner (a heckuva nice guy and an inspiration), he kinda subtly offered a smiley. We didn't bite, but thought it was a really kind gesture.

 

Look, this game works on the honor system, which requires at least mutual respect, if not affection for our fellow oddballs, er, cachers. The occasional nice gesture doesn't corrupt anything and does help bring out the best in people. Bureaucratic insistence on rigid rules undermines an honor system, and doesn't work anyway. Who checks every online log against the log book?

[CoyoteRed]

Quit griping and go caching.

In other words, "I'm a high numbers cacher, so I know what I'm talking about and you low number cachers don't so you don't have a voice, so now shut up."

 

I'll repeat: the only cacher who claimed a find on a cache, but didn't find it and the cache was still there was someone well into the 4 digits--someone you have no hope in catching. I don't care who you are or how many finds you've logged, you log a find on a cache of ours and didn't actually find it, you will be asked to change it or have your log deleted. Period.

Hey Coyote. How did you get all the meaning out of my 5 words? Just go and have fun.

I guess it was the limitations of the written word. That's how it came off to me. Sorry if I read it wrong.

[+Deermark]

No problem. I got into this game over 4 years ago and I still enjoy my last cache as much as I did my very first cache. The game has changed a lot over the years but I have learned to go with the flow. Back on subject. Most of my cache hides are in the woods with a at least a 1/4 mile hike. But some of mine require a 2 to 3 mile hikes. If a cacher takes the time to hike this far for one of my caches and it has vanished I will definitely let him count it as a find if in fact it is gone. If at all possible I want a cacher to come away from one of my hides feeling good and upbeat. All of my hides are of high quality as far as placement and contents. To me the game is not only about the container but also the hike into the area and the area itself. So if I check the cache and it is gone you better believe I will let you log it if you want to. Most people want to. High numbers or low numbers. A cheater is always going to cheat and an honest guy will be honest. I like to help the honest guy along.

[+The Leprechauns]

Quit griping and go caching.

In four years, there's 5,000 something cache finds and 18 forum posts (3 of which are in this thread). Looks like someone who follows their own advice.

[+Bjorn74]

I don't care one way or another, but I think more of these requests or the acts themselves come from the newer cachers around here. Maybe it's because we grew up in the Lep school of DNF and SBA stats. The newer cachers often aren't sure what counts and what doesn't for other folks. Or sometimes they think that a DNF makes them look bad.

 

Come to think of it, I think cache owners often think the same way.

 

But, I have frequently accidently logged a find and changed it to a DNF or Note. You get in a rhythm and can't break it. I usually try to make up a story to go along, though. Usually involving Fuscia swimming trunks, waterwings, and the Coast Guard.

[+CYBret]

I don't know how many times I've found myself typing the phrase "to thine own self be true" in these forums, but I ought to have it set up to enter automatically.

 

This game cannot be about competition (outside of the friendly sort) because there is no level playing field. Power hikers can get to places I can't. Retired guys have slightly more time on their hands than I do. The best I can hope for is to get my butt of the couch a little more today than I did yesterday.

 

"To thine own self be true." Set your own goals and decide how you want to play the game. Personally, I don't log locationless because I don't want them added to my count. I don't multi-log events because I don't want my "I attended" count messed up. I don't log "private caches" on geocaching.com's server because that just doesn't seem right at all. I've never made a cache machine run (yet) because it seemed like a cheap way to get to 1000. And I log all my DNF's.......usually.

 

Are these my rules? No, they're the parameters I've set for myself. If I do something different then I'm only cheating myself. I realize that if I'm shooting for that next big milestone there are quicker ways there, but if I'm going to be true to myself I'll get there my own way.

 

However....

 

logging a smiley on a DNF strikes me as incredibly selfish and really screws with the greater geocaching community. Your DNF isn't there to show that you suck as a cacher, it serves as a warning to those that follow that the cache might not be there or it might take a little more time than they're prepared for. It also serves as a warning to the cache owner that something might be wrong. When you log a find on a cache you didn't find (or if you don't log anything at all) you're just making it harder for the next guy...and not in a fun way.

 

Bret

[+OzGuff]

CYBret is my hero!

 

And I also want to add that I agree with that stuff he said...

[+The Leprechauns]

you're just making it harder for the next guy...and not in a fun way.

I just want to know some fun ways of making it harder. Perhaps that is a different thread.