Jump to content

Dnf But Asks Cache Owner For Find

OzGuff

By OzGuff
in General geocaching topics

Followers 2

Recommended Posts

briansnat

+briansnat

Posted
Posted
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.

I write a log for each of my visits. I think that's the point of logs, to share your experiences. If I visit 5 times and come up empty 5 gimes, its 5 DNF logs.

 

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.

 

It has always been my impression that the point of this sport is to find caches, not where they were, or might have been. When you search for a cache, there are two possible outcomes. You find it, or you don't. There is a log type for each. A "found it" for the former and a "DNF" for the latter.

 

Do so many people have such a lack of self esteem that they really need that fake smiley face and a big number next to their name to feel validated as a person?

 

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.

 

Cybret hit the nail on the head. That fake find could send others out in pursuit of a cache that is not there. I recall one geocacher who was lured into a fruitless 60+ mile RT search after a person logged a find on a cache that was long missing.

That might be playing the game your way, but your also involving others and possibly wasting their time. Then there are the people who will search longer and harder because "it has to be here, CCCacher found it yesterday!"

 

People who use programs like GSAK and Watcher won't see the log that says " :laughing: Got there and no cache but I'm logging the find anyway" all they will see is the :blink: .

Link to comment
Allen_L

+Allen_L

Posted
Posted
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!!

Sorta like I snickered, when I read the log about someone in the winter, putting a bottle of water in one of my geocaches which is at the end of a three mile hike?

 

:laughing:

Link to comment
twjolson & Kay

twjolson & Kay

Posted
Posted

Wow, shocking, another week goes by and another moron posts about someone logging a find that they shouldn't have! Why are people so stupid, why can't people just play the game their way and keep thier noses out of other peoples business. Who cares what they did, they are playing their game. So of course, with his tiny little brain, his first thought is to complain about it online, rather then use these boards to learn or teach, he wastes everyones time by adding yet another stupid post from another stupid cacher.

Link to comment
Mule Ears

+Mule Ears

Posted
Posted

I agree with CyBret. The narrowly defined circumstances in which I've been saying that it seems OK to change a DNF to a smiley are:

 

(1) Cacher finds evidence that a cache has been removed or destroyed.

(2) Cacher reports findings to the cache owner, who immediately disables the cache and makes a maintenance visit. Owner finds, sure enough, cache is gone/destroyed. He replaces or repairs it.

(3) Owner reactivates the cache and, entirely at his option, offers the cacher who found the remnants of his cache the opportunity to upgrade the DNF to 'Found.'

(4) Cacher accepts or declines the offer.

 

I am not talking about permitting any of the consequences that have been fabricated to support objections. Just the above scenario.

 

The wonderful thing is that this already happens, without the need for approval of any would-be geo-bureaucrats.

 

Deermark's post deserves to be framed. Excellent.

Link to comment
Keystone

Keystone

Posted
Posted
Wow, shocking, another week goes by and another moron posts about someone logging a find that they shouldn't have! Why are people so stupid, why can't people just play the game their way and keep thier noses out of other peoples business. Who cares what they did, they are playing their game. So of course, with his tiny little brain, his first thought is to complain about it online, rather then use these boards to learn or teach, he wastes everyones time by adding yet another stupid post from another stupid cacher.

Enjoy your vacation.

 

I now return the rest of you to the regularly scheduled discussion, already in progress, and to be conducted within the boundaries of the posted Forum Guidelines, including respect for those holding differing opinions.

Link to comment
briansnat

+briansnat

Posted
Posted (edited)
Wow, shocking, another week goes by and another moron posts about someone logging a find that they shouldn't have!  Why are people so stupid, why can't people just play the game their way and keep thier noses out of other peoples business. Who cares what they did, they are playing their game. So of course, with his tiny little brain, his first thought is to complain about it online, rather then use these boards to learn or teach, he wastes everyones time by adding yet another stupid post from another stupid cacher.

 

c6831dd5-1104-4c46-bc45-05bbcee4b8bc.jpg

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment
StarBrand

+StarBrand

Posted
Posted
...(1) Cacher finds evidence that a cache has been removed or destroyed.

(2) Cacher reports findings to the cache owner, who immediately disables the cache and makes a maintenance visit. Owner finds, sure enough, cache is gone/destroyed. He replaces or repairs it.

(3) Owner reactivates the cache and, entirely at his option, offers the cacher who found the remnants of his cache the opportunity to upgrade the DNF to 'Found.'

(4) Cacher accepts or declines the offer. ....

These are the same (pretty much) circumstances I was referring to.

Link to comment
OzGuff

+OzGuff

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Sorta like I snickered, when I read the log about someone in the winter, putting a bottle of water in one of my geocaches which is at the end of a three mile hike?

 

:blink:

But if I remember correctly didn't someone go out and retreive the bottle of water before it could do any damage? No harm done. :laughing:

 

[Allen -- thanks for getting that bottle of water!]

Link to comment
Allen_L

+Allen_L

Posted
Posted (edited)
[Allen -- thanks for getting that bottle of water!]

No problem, I had a good time, for some reason I really like that area. I must since I have been in there 4 times on 3 different trails. But I did snicker when I read the log. :laughing:

 

And every time the cache was gone, all the hunters logged DNF's until I replaced it.

Edited by AllenLacy
Link to comment
Deermark

+Deermark

Posted
Posted

It still comes down to the owner holds all the cards. If I want I can let you log the cache from 1000 miles away I can...but then again that would be cheating. The best thing I like about Geocaching is the lack of written rules. To each his own. I hate to make everyone jealous but I am leaving work early to go cache. After all isn't that what Geocaching is all about. Actually going out and finding caches and not writing about finding caches.

Link to comment
Mule Ears

+Mule Ears

Posted
Posted

Starbrand, your previous post indicates that you and I are in agreement. I posted the clarification because objections were cropping up based upon hypothetical situations substantially different from this scenario (e.g., a 'Found' log being posted when the cache is gone and not restored).

 

Go get 'em, Deermark!

Link to comment
Old Bet

+Old Bet

Posted
Posted

Cleary, we are not high number cachers..check our profile if you don't believe me. If we don't find a cache, we don't find a cache, and that's what we record.

 

There is another aspect to this (I skimmed this thread and hope I was not repeating what already was written.)

 

Claim a find for a DNF, and a scan of the cache page will not reveal that there may be a problem with the cache. So some poor schlub will go hunting for a cache that is not there. Yeah, maybe he should have read the logs, but one reason to post DNFs is to alert other cachers, as well as the cache owner, to the potential problem.

Link to comment
Mule Ears

+Mule Ears

Posted
Posted
...will not reveal that there may be a problem with the cache. So some poor schlub will go hunting for a cache that is not there.

 

Those of us who've been saying it could be OK to change a DNF to a :laughing: have specified that it would be retroactive--after the cache had been restored. The point is to encourage DNF reporting to help the owner (and others) keep track of a cache's status.

Link to comment
Suziq

+Suziq

Posted
Posted
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.

You arrive at work your lathe is broken. You report its broken and go find another lathe or do something else.

 

Or better yet :

You arrive at work your lathe is broken you leave and go caching. :laughing:

Link to comment
M4T

+M4T

Posted
Posted
Wow, shocking, another week goes by and another moron posts about someone logging a find that they shouldn't have!  Why are people so stupid, why can't people just play the game their way and keep thier noses out of other peoples business. Who cares what they did, they are playing their game. So of course, with his tiny little brain, his first thought is to complain about it online, rather then use these boards to learn or teach, he wastes everyones time by adding yet another stupid post from another stupid cacher.

"Hello Pot? This is the Kettle"...

 

Brilliant way to chime in there olson twins......

Link to comment
Harry Dolphin

+Harry Dolphin

Posted
Posted
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?

This quote seems the appropriate one for me to cite...

I've had two people find a cache, but not sign the log. They didn't seem to like the suspicious people in the neighborhood. Both changed the 'find' to a 'note' at my suggestion. They replaced the cache without signing the log.

On the other hand, I've found two caches strewn about the landscape. I signed a paper on one, and put it in the cache, back where it was probbly hidden. The other I removed as 'geotrash'. It had many teeth-mark holes in it, and was unusable, and I do not know where it was originally hidden. The first I logged a find (and an SBA shortly thereafter). The second I asked, and received permission, to log. On an missing cache in a rest stop, I was offered the option to log it. I declined, and waited for the replacement to log.

On the other fin... I am the proud owner of a webcam. The rules are specific. "Post your picture (taken by the webcam) here as proof that you were there." It is not an easy webcam. That is noted on the page. Weather can be bad. Cell phone reception can be bad. But the rules are specific. By my count, one third of the people who logged it did not fill the requirement "Post your picture (taken by the webcam) here as proof that you were there." My favorite excuse is "It was too windy." Hunh??? I will say that most asked to change the 'log' to a 'note' complied. One had a bad e-mail address.

This does make me question the basic honesty of mankind, but geocahers specifically. I went to a webcam that was not operational. I came back a few weeks later and logged it then. Aargh. Oh, well.

Link to comment
fizzymagic

+fizzymagic

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

Hmm... Interesting. So you think perhaps it's jealousy?

 

All I know is that, in my experience, the willingness of cachers to bend the "rules" to get more finds is pretty highly correlated with the total number of finds. That's not terribly surprising; on average, cachers with more finds probably think numbers are more important than those with fewer finds, and, human nature being what it is, they have a bigger incentive to "cheat," if that's what you would call it.

 

It's sad, really; many big-numbers cachers I have met seem very driven, and seem to derive a significant amount of their self-worth from the number of caches they have found. For them to project some kind of jealousy on the part of people less obsessed is a shame.

Link to comment
Deermark

+Deermark

Posted
Posted (edited)

Jealousy. Not sure how you came up with that. Never said that and never meant that. Anyone can get numbers. It is easy. Just go caching. Geocaching was invented to be fun. Whenever I feel like getting on the forums and griping I go caching. Much more relaxing. Can I log this post as a find? :laughing:

Edited by Deermark
Link to comment
OzGuff

+OzGuff

Posted
  • Author
Posted

To get back on topic I want to point out that I wasn't trying to malign anyone -- high or low -- just trying to gauge the prevailing sentiment. We all play by the same guidelines but we interpret them differently. And that is how it should be.

 

I may disagree with your interpretation of the guidelines but will defend your right to interpret the guidelines as you see fit.

 

It seems to me that enough folks have gotten ticked off so I will close the topic. Thanks to all who participated.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 2
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...