Why Log A Dnf . . .

[+VegasCacheHounds]

<snip>

Having said that, I still don't log a DNF if something like a flat tire, Sasquatch attack, or a nuclear holocaust prevents me from actually getting to the cache site to look around. Okay, maybe I'd still log a DNF after the Sasquatch attack, if  I survived.

Why not? The rest of us want to read about your experience, successful or not.

I also never consider it a DNF if something external prevents me from reaching ground zero. This would be a road washed out, alien abductions, stuff like that.

 

But, it sure as heck deserves a note so others can be made aware.

Both of those situations are likely to happen in your caching area!

[+Moose Mob]

<snip>

Having said that, I still don't log a DNF if something like a flat tire, Sasquatch attack, or a nuclear holocaust prevents me from actually getting to the cache site to look around. Okay, maybe I'd still log a DNF after the Sasquatch attack, if  I survived.

Why not? The rest of us want to read about your experience, successful or not.

I also never consider it a DNF if something external prevents me from reaching ground zero. This would be a road washed out, alien abductions, stuff like that.

 

But, it sure as heck deserves a note so others can be made aware.

Both of those situations are likely to happen in your caching area!

Yes, and usualy at the same time.

 

Most people do not realize that alien abductions cannot occur in a moving vehicle.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

given the interesting definitions of "FOUND" lately, this oughta be good...

 

Yes!

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

My point was that if I believe it is TRULY a DNF, I will so log . . . if not, I will not, as it may well be MY problem and not the cache hide.

A DNF is TRULY a DNF if you made an attempt to find a cache and Did Not Find the cache.

 

Seems pretty simple. Facts is facts.

 

If you visited twice and did not find the cache twice, that's two DNFs. Been there, done that. Will continue to do that in the future.

 

Until I get the hang of this game, I expect I'll have a lot of DNFs to log.

Yes. We always fle DNFs, as appropriate. My wife and I have found many caches, including many very tough caches, but we still regularly log DNFs as well, often on 1/1 and 2/2 caches. A DNF is not a judgement on our ability nor a besmirchment of our reputation. Rather, it is simply a DNF. Period.

[+saxdiva and mr. vibes]

Even if you don't get "close" to the cache, a DNF can still be valuable information. Maybe you stopped at the trailhead because of a "trail closed" sign. Would your log include this information? You still didn't find the cache, but your log will tell why.

 

At the time I was racking up DNFs 1-3, I had no idea why I couldn't find it. All I knew was that it seemed to have been found WAY too recently to have vanished by the time I got there.

 

The owner can read that and disable the cache until the trail reopens. it doesn't mean you "failed" in your search, only that you didn't find the cache. Many times there are extenuating circumstances. A DNF doesn't mean you're a bad cacher.

 

Okay, I get all that. In my case, however, I didn't have anything useful to report, and since the cache was just a few blocks away, I figured I could always take another stab at it--remember, I was there FOUR times for a 1/1--and see if I had any better luck the next day. If I'd been unable to get to the cache because of a closed road or trail, or if I knew of any other problems along those lines, I'd not only log the DNF but I might even follow up with details in an e-mail to the cache owner.

 

As it turns out, however, this was a case of a noob who didn't think to check the stupid coordinates in the GPS before making three unsuccessful attempts. While I was happy to 'fess up to that in the end, it still seems like that would have not only cluttered up the cache logs, but also sent the owner on a wasted trip to check on it. And knowing this particular cache owner, if I had logged three DNFs on his 1/1 micro, he would have been out there ready to replace it.

 

So... perhaps this is a major rule violation, and I should be flogged. But it does suggest to me that there should be room for at least a little common-sense interpretation on this...

[+tozainamboku]

So... perhaps this is a major rule violation, and I should be flogged. But it does suggest to me that there should be room for at least a little common-sense interpretation on this...

Leanne -

 

Don't let the people on the forums bully you. You are never required to log online - either Find or DNF. I hope this thread has pointed out some good reason why you might want to log your DNFs. Newbies often look at a DNF as a failure. It is not a failure but just a place where you can describe your experience even though you did not find the cache.

 

I like to log all my DNFs because then I can compute my geocaching percentage = the number of times I found the cache divided by the number of times I looked for a cache. The number of time I looked for a cache is the sum of my found logs and my DNF logs because I log all my DNFs.

 

As I was telling you on Sunday, look at my logs for Burbank Park 'N Grab. I logged DNF on that cache 5 times before I found it.

 

Marty

[+saxdiva and mr. vibes]

As I was telling you on Sunday, look at my logs for Burbank Park 'N Grab. I logged DNF on that cache 5 times before I found it.

Only five? Heck, I bet I can beat THAT...

[+New England n00b]

Can I post a favorite DNF? Too bad, did it anyway. I don't like DNF's but I don't shy away from it either.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Even if you don't get "close" to the cache, a DNF can still be valuable information. Maybe you stopped at the trailhead because of a "trail closed" sign. Would your log include this information? You still didn't find the cache, but your log will tell why.

 

At the time I was racking up DNFs 1-3, I had no idea why I couldn't find it. All I knew was that it seemed to have been found WAY too recently to have vanished by the time I got there.

 

The owner can read that and disable the cache until the trail reopens. it doesn't mean you "failed" in your search, only that you didn't find the cache. Many times there are extenuating circumstances. A DNF doesn't mean you're a bad cacher.

 

Okay, I get all that. In my case, however, I didn't have anything useful to report, and since the cache was just a few blocks away, I figured I could always take another stab at it--remember, I was there FOUR times for a 1/1--and see if I had any better luck the next day. If I'd been unable to get to the cache because of a closed road or trail, or if I knew of any other problems along those lines, I'd not only log the DNF but I might even follow up with details in an e-mail to the cache owner.

 

As it turns out, however, this was a case of a noob who didn't think to check the stupid coordinates in the GPS before making three unsuccessful attempts. While I was happy to 'fess up to that in the end, it still seems like that would have not only cluttered up the cache logs, but also sent the owner on a wasted trip to check on it. And knowing this particular cache owner, if I had logged three DNFs on his 1/1 micro, he would have been out there ready to replace it.

 

So... perhaps this is a major rule violation, and I should be flogged. But it does suggest to me that there should be room for at least a little common-sense interpretation on this...

Since you're a sax player, I won't flog you

 

(then again, maybe I should)

 

The cache owner could have gotten quite the chuckle out of you entering the wrong coords. It would have been something to talk about at event caches for months to come

[+GRANPA ALEX]

Can we summarize what we have discussed, add your thoughts, too.

 

We should always log a DNF to share our caching experience BUT, in the log, indicate that the cache may be/probably is sound . . . we just did not find it.

 

If we believe it IS lost/muggled, we should do a note to the owner explaining all the steps we took to find it, where we looked etc. such that the owner can take appropriate action (repair, replace, archive).

 

All of this lets the owner make a decision as to whether a trip to the cache is needed and lets those who follow us make a decision as to whether to hunt the cache, not hunt the cache or see it as a greater challenge.

 

It also lets the owner know if the cache difficulty ratings needs to be adjusted.

 

Is this a complete summary of our ideas?

[+Les Nomades]

Couldn't have said it better

[+BlueDeuce]

Can we summarize what we have discussed, add your thoughts, too.

 

We should always log a DNF to share our caching experience BUT, in the log, indicate that the cache may be/probably is sound . . . we just did not find it.

 

If we believe it IS lost/muggled, we should do a note to the owner explaining all the steps we took to find it, where we looked etc. such that the owner can take appropriate action (repair, replace, archive).

 

All of this lets the owner make a decision as to whether a trip to the cache is needed and lets those who follow us make a decision as to whether to hunt the cache, not hunt the cache or see it as a greater challenge.

 

It also lets the owner know if the cache difficulty ratings needs to be adjusted.

 

Is this a complete summary of our ideas?

No belief, just the facts. "Blue lid on the ground, no cache found"

 

If I have found the cache before the owner will take that into account and 'believe' the cache is missing.

[+Wadcutter]

I'm almost afraid to ask:  When would you post a SBA log?

I've sent 2 SBAs. In both cases I found only the remains of the caches. The containers had been hit by animals, chewed all to pieces and contents were scattered all over the area. Both containers had been food containers. Regardless how well they had been washed I think food smell probably remained which attracted the animals. I retrieved all what I could, including what was left of the logs, then recommended SBA since there was nothing there to find. Everything was well past putting back together. Near 1 we found a TB that had lost the fight with whatever was chewing up the container. That was a year and half ago. Looks like he's still out there traveling tho.

 

 

This pix is what remained of the cache container. The globs behing the tiger were bits and pieces of "stuff". What I didn't photo was the other side of the container near the lid area had been completely chewed thru even more than the bottom which shows in this pix.

 

Edited December 16, 2005 by Wadcutter

[+briansnat]

Don't let the people on the forums bully you. You are never required to log online - either Find or DNF.

 

Lets not slide into hyperbole here. Nobody is bullying anybody. Can't people express an opinion without being accused of bullying?

 

And for those of you who think you're doing the cache owner a "favor" by not logging DNFs, think again. Look at the hide counts of the people who are most strongly on the side of logging all DNFs and you'll generally see they are people who have a good number of hides.

Edited December 16, 2005 by briansnat

[+WalruZ]

hide counts of the people who are most strongly on the side of logging all DNFs and you'll generally see they are people who have a good number of hides.

 

and finds as well. All of the 'number' cachers I know log DNFs as a matter of course. Most hiders I know will wait for multiple DNFs, or a particularly specific DNF (I looked under the mailbox and there was nothing there...) before trotting out to deal with something. I know a 4K cacher whose rule is, if he pulls up to the cache site it counts as a search, and he either logs a F or a DNF.

 

I myself have logged a DNF like "didn't get out of the car, too many kids hanging out in the park." It's information, for whatever it's worth.

 

SBA's are for people who don't maintain their caches and don't answer their emails.

[+wavector]

Don't let the people on the forums bully you. You are never required to log online - either Find or DNF.

 

Lets not slide into hyperbole here. Nobody is bullying anybody. Can't people express an opinion without being accused of bullying?

 

And for those of you who think you're doing the cache owner a "favor" by not logging DNFs, think again. Look at the hide counts of the people who are most strongly on the side of logging all DNFs and you'll generally see they are people who have a good number of hides.

Geocaching would be far less fun if we were all wimps.

 

When I log a DNF I am really recording an Experience. All the things that I do that are related to geocaching are experiences. A problem arises when the site tries to shoehorn those experiences into a single Find number. The Did Not Find can be a fun and positive adventure in a geocaching day, straight roads can be boring. Jeremy said that the Find count is going to be removed from the logs and at the same time that happens I think the number called Find should be replaced by a new number called Experience.

We should be allowed to select all the components that total up to our own Experience. We should be allowed to add Finds to our Experience, we should be allowed to add DNF's to our Experience, we should be allowed to add Travel Bugs to our Experience, we should be allowed to add Benchmarks to our Experience, we should be allowed to add Forum Posts to our Experience. We should be allowed to add Notes to our Experience. If someone visits one of my caches, I should be able to have that visit add to my Experience.

Let people choose to increment their Experience in whatever fashion they see fit.

 

There is some formula that Groundspeak is using now to come up with a Find count, let us choose our own formula and call our Find count our Experience. It really would become a number that meant nothing and everything. Every person would be deciding for themselves what they used to increment their Experience.

 

It is all about experiences and the adventure should not be overshadowed by any numbers. Assign a default Experience similar to todays Find (that counts whatever) but let people choose to make their own Experience number using any of a variety of database columns, any thing that is recorded could work. If the DNF's added to your Experience then people would be far more inclined to log them.

 

So yes, I am proposing that at some point in the future the DNF's be counted as Finds.

[+Vinny & Sue Team]

Don't let the people on the forums bully you. You are never required to log online - either Find or DNF.

 

Lets not slide into hyperbole here. Nobody is bullying anybody. Can't people express an opinion without being accused of bullying?

 

And for those of you who think you're doing the cache owner a "favor" by not logging DNFs, think again. Look at the hide counts of the people who are most strongly on the side of logging all DNFs and you'll generally see they are people who have a good number of hides.

Brian, very well put! Thank you! I file DNFs religiously, and often reading DNF logs is more fun than reading find logs.

[+tozainamboku]

Don't let the people on the forums bully you. You are never required to log online - either Find or DNF.

 

Lets not slide into hyperbole here. Nobody is bullying anybody. Can't people express an opinion without being accused of bullying?

 

And for those of you who think you're doing the cache owner a "favor" by not logging DNFs, think again. Look at the hide counts of the people who are most strongly on the side of logging all DNFs and you'll generally see they are people who have a good number of hides.

Brian -

 

I am one of those that agree that you should log all your DNFs and have no problem with you expressing your opinion. I think this thread has given some great reason for logging DNFs. However, I also think that everyone can make there own decision when to log a DNF. There is no rule saying you must log every DNF, there isn't even a rule saying you must log your find online. A newbie reading the thread took some comment as a criticism she wasn't following the rules so I told her not to be bullied by the forums. My comment was addressed more at her jumping to conclusions about rules, and not was not intended to mean that those expressing their opinions were bullies.

 

Marty

[+hikemeister]

I always log a DNF when I actually get to the location and have time for a good search. If I reach the spot and cannot seach because (like many of our local caches) it is hidden at the entrance of a busy shopping area and there are dozens of muggles nearby, then I come back later -- and do not log a DNF. As a cache owner DNF logs are helpful to me in regard to (1) knowing when a cache likely has gone missing, and (2) knowing when I have rated the difficulty of a cache too low. Some people I know never log DNF. I don't know what they are worried about -- it is not like they are going to get a black mark on their record if they have many DNF logs. Perhaps it is just a time issue.

Edited December 16, 2005 by hikemeister

[+Mudfrog]

I'm almost afraid to ask:  When would you post a SBA log?

I've sent 2 SBAs. In both cases I found only the remains of the caches. The containers had been hit by animals, chewed all to pieces and contents were scattered all over the area. Both containers had been food containers. Regardless how well they had been washed I think food smell probably remained which attracted the animals. I retrieved all what I could, including what was left of the logs, then recommended SBA since there was nothing there to find. Everything was well past putting back together. Near 1 we found a TB that had lost the fight with whatever was chewing up the container. That was a year and half ago. Looks like he's still out there traveling tho.

 

 

This pix is what remained of the cache container. The globs behing the tiger were bits and pieces of "stuff". What I didn't photo was the other side of the container near the lid area had been completely chewed thru even more than the bottom which shows in this pix.

 

I know this is off topic but kind of related,,,

 

Yes these two caches were obviously destroyed. I might be missing something here but I think that a cache log describing what was found and/or an email to the owner telling of the mess would be more appropriate. Im thinking most cachers would probably want to simply go replace or repair the cache instead of having someone reccomend archiving. The cache owner (if they are still around) should decide whether they want to archive or not. Meanwhile, the cache should be temporarily disabled.

 

That being said, the SBA option still needs to be available for caches that we may think are hidden inappropriately. Then the reviewer and cache owner work with each other to see if the SBA is legitimate!

[+New England n00b]

Can we summarize what we have discussed, add your thoughts, too.

 

We should always log a DNF to share our caching experience BUT, in the log, indicate that the cache may be/probably is sound . . . we just did not find it.

 

If we believe it IS lost/muggled, we should do a note to the owner explaining all the steps we took to find it, where we looked etc. such that the owner can take appropriate action (repair, replace, archive).

 

All of this lets the owner make a decision as to whether a trip to the cache is needed and lets those who follow us make a decision as to whether to hunt the cache, not hunt the cache or see it as a greater challenge.

 

It also lets the owner know if the cache difficulty ratings needs to be adjusted.

 

Is this a complete summary of our ideas?

I'd like to add that any potential spoilers be encrypted in your log, so future log readers won't get any of the good suprise spoiled.

 

As far as SBA logs, I've filed 2, both after not hearing from the cache owner & noting they had not logged on to geocaching.com in a lengthy period of time. One was filled with urine, one was a puzzle cache that was never fixed. Both were adopted and fixed up real nice.

[+saxdiva and mr. vibes]

Since you're a sax player, I won't flog you

 

(then again, maybe I should)

I'm mostly a bari player. Doesn't that pretty much guarantee me a flogging?

 

Oops... back on topic...

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Since you're a sax player, I won't flog you

 

(then again, maybe I should)

I'm mostly a bari player. Doesn't that pretty much guarantee me a flogging?

 

Oops... back on topic...

I play bari too

[+Sagefox]

Even if you don't get "close" to the cache, a DNF can still be valuable information. Maybe you stopped at the trailhead because of a "trail closed" sign. Would your log include this information? You still didn't find the cache, but your log will tell why.

DNF's or Notes (either one is appropriate) for this condition are usually interesting as you suggest and are often posted. I see them on some of my caches and they can be fun, informative and interesting. I post them myself when I consider them informative or entertaining. I don't think there is much disagreement about the value of this type of log.

 

What many people do though when the cache is in, shall we say, in a less than unique spot or has what might be considered lower functions and values (trying to avoid the L word), is choose not to log anything, especially if the find effort was only a lazy attempt.

[Capt. Kidd]

A DNF is simply that a "Did Not Find." I log every one of these as it is a history of the cache as others have said. There's nothing to be ashamed of as it is all part of the game. I've actually logged three DNF's on the same cache! That doesn't mean that the cache isn't there just that that particualar cache is my nemisis! I had 5 straight DNF's on one of my caches and this prompted me to go check on it and I discovered that it was simply too tough of a find so I modified it somewhat. Without that feedback the cache would have simply remainded unfound and of no use to anyone.

 

Not logging a DNF is not playing in the spirit of the game in my opinion.

[Capt. Kidd]

Sorry, multiple post.

Edited December 17, 2005 by Capt. Kidd

[Major Catastrophe]

I almost never log a DNF unless ....

 

Does this make sense?

Nope. It don't make no sense. The only REAL reason for not logging a DNF is if you don't want to admit that you just couldn't find the cache.

 

If you try, and fail, to find a cache, then log the DNF. There are a few of us who deliberately hide 'em so they're hard to find. By not logging your time spent fruitlessly flogging foliage, you deny us the validation of our efforts.

[+az_pistolero]

Since this is my opinion, I also think that saying, "Logging a DNF just because I did not find it doesn't make sense--I don't know that it's not there" is the same thing as saying, "Logging a find because I found the cache right on the coordinates, just as described, doesn't make any sense. It was obviously there." I think that neither of these statements make sense.  If it's probably there and you didn't find it--DNF. If it's there and you find it-- Found. We all play our own game...but you did  ask.

Well said . . . I did ask! I like the way you put a thought together, kinda makes me want to revisit my OP ideas. THANKS!

This reminds me of a flight I was on once. The flight attendant gets on the intercom and announces,

 

"The pilot has found what he believes to be Chicago O'Hare International Airport. In preparation for landing at this airport, please raise your seat backs and tray tables..."

 

[+Right Wing Wacko]

DNF stands for DID NOT FIND.

 

When I go on a cache hunt one of two things happens.

 

1. I find the cache

2. I do NOT find the cache.

 

Hopefully #1 happens more often than #2.

 

I log appropriatly. I have no problem admitting failure. Even if it's only temporary (I will often come back and find it later).

 

DNF does not mean the cache isn't there. It means I did not find it.

Edited December 19, 2005 by Right Wing Wacko

[kablooey]

I know a 4K cacher whose rule is, if he pulls up to the cache site it counts as a search, and he either logs a F or a DNF. 

 

That's a tough rule to live by. I already have over 850 DNFs, and I don't come anywhere close to following that strict of a rule. If I make a halfway decent attempt to find the cache, I'll log a DNF. If I just park the car and a cop appears behind me, and I drive off, I'll log a Note. If I walk up to a site at 1am and a dog starts barking at me and won't stop, I'll probably leave and log a Note. But, I do try to log something, so that cache owners know that I tried to visit. And many of these ARE cache maintenance issues. The cache owner should point out when a park closes at sunset on the cache page or warn about barking dogs. If police or persistent muggles are often in the cache area, it's useful information for the cache owner and other searchers.

 

Some examples of Notes from this past weekend:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...00-845b58cfbcd7

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...bc-8e5913d5bce6

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...e0-7c1781c13e67

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...f2-de9a8c941138

 

(There were 26 DNFs; so I won't post links to those.)

Edited December 28, 2005 by kablooey

[+sept1c_tank]

I know a 4K cacher whose rule is, if he pulls up to the cache site it counts as a search, and he either logs a F or a DNF. 

 

That's a tough rule to live by. I already have over 850 DNFs...

You should be on somebody's leader board.

[+tands]

S doesn't understand why I did this, but I logged our second DNF on The Bus Driver because I spent another couple of hours trying to solve it without success.

 

So, DNFs are acceptible even on caches you don't get in the area of if you flail properly on the puzzle. I even got permission from the owner to log the 'armchair DNF!'

 

Note: I finally solved it, doh. But still need to make the grab.

 

- T of TandS

[flowerswife]

This was a good topic. Being a new family to geocaching. DNF's have been very informitive for us.

 

First we post them if we go and seach and did not find it. Usually we mention that we are new and simply where outsmarted. We get good results. Once we had a owner email us and give us a hint ( we had mentioned we didnt understand the clue in our DNF. Another one we went and looked it was a very simple cache and searched ALOT. logged a DNF and then went back again. Still did not find. we just went and edited our DNF to add we looked again and still could not find instead of creating a whole new DNF. The owner emailed and said it has been vandalized before and confirmed we where in the exact location and said he would go check on it.

 

then we went to one that we just could not find but knew it was there somewhere. Logged the DNF we mentioned in it that some of the area was closed down due to the fact that its winter and we thought it was located some where in that section. A day later someone did a found it and mentioned they sent someone into that section. that communication helped us to see we could find it too and it would be worth going back to.

 

Another one we logged as a DNF, but mentioned it was getting dark and we were going back, we have tried twice since then and still have a DNF, we have read other DNF's on this cache that say they did not find but later find it and we have seen found it logs after ours so we know to keep looking and its just more difficult then the rating says

 

We log them with the attitude that we probibly missed it. That way if it is missing others will also not find it ( hopefully log it) and the owner will check it and make a note. or we are just wandering fools who again didnt think outside the box

 

When I look at caches to go find. We too read all the logs, it really gives us a good idea if it is one we need to be prepared to look hard for and need to set enough time for it. If there is only found it's, we automatically used to think that ment it was really easy and would have no difficulty finding it.( giving us the ability to fit 10 caches of those types in a day instead of 3 or 4 more difficult ones.)

 

As the owner of one very new cache. We are glad to get logs DNF OR found, because it gives a really good idea how people feel and respond to our cache.

 

So I guess with all this rambling we vote for a YES log the DNF's. We love like others have mentioned reading the history of the caches it gives them personality.And getting a very informitive look at whats in store for us!

 

Flowerswife

Edited December 28, 2005 by flowerswife

[+GeoJunkie]

My philosophy matches several of the others here: If I make a halfway decent search for the cache and don't find it, it's a DNF. The key word for me is search. If I get to the coordinates (or what I think are the coordinates in the case of some puzzles), and look around and don't find it, I log a DNF. If I don't make a search, then there's no DNF.

 

I know there's been a lot of talk on the DNF being helpful to the cache owners, and I agree, but the DNF can also be helpful to me! I've had a couple caches where I posted a DNF, thengot an offer of help from the cache owner! On one occasion, the owner actually met me at the cache spot and sot of guided me to the right place to look with subtle hints. Later, I DNFed another of his caches, and together we realized that it was actually gone! He even gave me his cell phone number to call if I needed help on some other caches, which I used on a couple of occasions.

[+Freebee & 007]

A newbies prospective:

Initially I mistakenly felt that a DNF would be a reflection of MY shortcomings.

In certain cases it is.

I took a DNF on a local cache, the cache owner took mercy on me and emailed a clue. Later I returned to find it.

I wondered why he would bother with someone with less than 50 finds.

Perhaps he didn't want to see any DNF logs on his page or maybe he felt sorry for a noob?

 

I then placed my first hide, anxiously watched the logs. Some of the "Local Legends" found it, then a DNF..Hmmm. I checked the the Stats of the DNF'er and they were fairly new to the sport. I emailed them with an additional clue.

 

My theory is WE need as many players as we can get. I don't want to see anyone get discouraged with the sport because they couldn't find an easy cache.

Perhaps this is purely noob sentiment, however that clue I received helped form my perspective of Geocachers.

Remember you were all newbies at some point...Even you Cache Masters!

[+fratermus]

Logging a DNF because I have not found it makes no sense .

I think that sensible people could go either way on the issue.

 

The text of the DNF entry is probably more important than the DNF itself.

 

"Here on vacation, couldn't find it" is a different beast than "been here 12x with someone who has already found it, and we can't find it now".

 

If the cacheplacer feels strongly about it, s/he might put a note to that effect in the cache listing.

[+Team Neos]

If I look for a cache, and don't find it, I log a DNF.

 

I also tell a bit about the search. A cache owner might decide to check up on a cache if three or four reasonably experienced cachers say that they looked for half an hour each for a 1-star or 2-star hide---on the other hand, they might gloat smugly if the same cachers said they spent 1/2 an hour looking for a 3 or 4-star hide.

 

When I was very very new (less than 20 hides) I had a cache owner tell me that they never posted a DNF unless they were sure that the cache was missing. That completely mystified me ~ How would I know that something is missing if I didn't know where it was to begin with?

 

If I do suspect that the cache really is missing I write directly to the owner, as well as posting what I see on the cache page.

EX: cache pages implies there are bushes, but the GPS zeroes out at big holes

EX: no container found, but scrap of paper and broken McToy

 

If I look again for five minutes and don't look anywhere that I didn't look before, and no one else has been there since I was last there, I don't clutter up the cache page with a new DNF (although I keep track and fess up later).

 

On the other hand, if I go back to look and don't because of something about the cache I will post a new DNF.

EX: there are always too many people around

EX: there is new construction there, or there has been a huge mudflow, earthquake, festival being held, etc

 

I also post a new DNF if I went back and spent 45 minutes looking in every nook and cranny ~twice~ and didn't find it.

 

I have posted multiple DNFs on caches rated 1/1 that everyone else (including a person who said it was their first find) said "Thanks for the easy one!" DNF means "Did not find" not that I am too stupid to find even if I trip over it.

(I have, by the way, stood on top of a cache and posted a DNF on it--thanks ARF!)

Edited because I can't spell as fast as I type.

Edited December 28, 2005 by Team Neos

[+wimseyguy]

I know a 4K cacher whose rule is, if he pulls up to the cache site it counts as a search, and he either logs a F or a DNF. 

 

That's a tough rule to live by. I already have over 850 DNFs, and I don't come anywhere close to following that strict of a rule. If I make a halfway decent attempt to find the cache, I'll log a DNF. If I just park the car and a cop appears behind me, and I drive off, I'll log a Note. If I walk up to a site at 1am and a dog starts barking at me and won't stop, I'll probably leave and log a Note. But, I do try to log something, so that cache owners know that I tried to visit. And many of these ARE cache maintenance issues. The cache owner should point out when a park closes at sunset on the cache page or warn about barking dogs. If police or persistent muggles are often in the cache area, it's useful information for the cache owner and other searchers.

 

Some examples of Notes from this past weekend:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...00-845b58cfbcd7

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...bc-8e5913d5bce6

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...e0-7c1781c13e67

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LU...f2-de9a8c941138

 

(There were 26 DNFs; so I won't post links to those.)

Another perfect example of playing the sport the way you want to play it. The numbers only matter from one's own persepctive, and should not be how a player is judged. Posting nothing at all is irresopnsible IMO. And since there are a lot of newer players reading this thread I'll point out that I've never met Kablooey, but would really like to some day.

 

Not only is his post count<<<find count, which is a stat I value, but unless I'm mistaken he holds the record for most consecutive days with a find! I don't know the exact number but It's large and three digits. Now that's a cacher I respect for their committment; or is it need to be committed? ( I get so confused this time of year )

[+ZackJones]

Logging a DNF isn't a bad thing. It simply means you couldn't find it. Check out the logs for this cache GCPNRD - The Wizard of OZ. Two other folks were able to find it the same day that I couldn't. I'll be going back this weekend for a 2nd try

[+Fairly Oddparents]

OP: What is wrong with a DNF log prompting actions by the owner?

 

If I received a single DNF on a cache, I would not immediately run out and check on the cache. However, if I received several DNFs in a row, I would go check. If none of those people logged their DNFs, I wouldn't know there was a problem with the cache.

 

Also, if I received a DNF, I would e-mail an extra hint to the person who logged it. I want people to enjoy caching as much as I do so I wouldn't want them to be frustrated by banging their head against a wall searching for a cache.

 

I log DNFs after I have tried to find a cache twice. Logging a DNF does not reflect poorly on the person who logged it. It doesn't mean you are a failure.

[+wandererrob]

Can we summarize what we have discussed, add your thoughts, too.

 

We should always log a DNF to share our caching experience BUT, in the log, indicate that the cache may be/probably is sound . . . we just did not find it.

 

If we believe it IS lost/muggled, we should do a note to the owner explaining all the steps we took to find it, where we looked etc. such that the owner can take appropriate action (repair, replace, archive).

 

All of this lets the owner make a decision as to whether a trip to the cache is needed and lets those who follow us make a decision as to whether to hunt the cache, not hunt the cache or see it as a greater challenge.

 

It also lets the owner know if the cache difficulty ratings needs to be adjusted.

 

Is this a complete summary of our ideas?

I'd say that sums it all up nicely.