Jump to content

DNF instead of FTF


Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I'm a relatively new geocacher, but I've done enough reading of log files and forum posts to see that good manners are a large part of what makes this sport fun.

After some thoughtful searching, I set up my own cache and it was approved yesterday. Within two hours someone posted a DNF with several complaints and a statement that they didn't enjoy the site. ;)

Since then, two other people have found it with relative ease and no complaints.

I don't want to be a whiner, but I'm disappointed that the first log note on my first cache is so disparaging. The only DNF I've posted was after returning to the site several times and searching thoroughly with a couple of other people. To post one quickly suggests lack of searching effort rather than a bad hide.

 

Would anyone care to give their opinion? :ph34r:

Link to comment

Sometimes you have to take the bad with the good. Nobody much likes it but it is part of this little activity of ours.

 

A DNF simply means they looked and Did Not Find. I believe that you should always post a DNF log if that is what happened. I post 1 DNF for every 5 finds on average. Doesn't mean the cache is missing or in distress - just that a particular finder couldn't find it. It may be a difficult find. Maybe they only had 10 minutes to search. Who cares except that they did search and did not find.

 

As for the location - not everybody likes the same thing. Oh well if it didn't suit thier tastes.

 

Leave the log alone.

Link to comment

I looked at the log and found it to be a factual summary of what that geocacher saw. Complaints about tree cover are common -- that is a great excuse for a DNF. And if they saw a fire ant hill, that's what they saw. I'd appreciate that warning. And nobody has any control over muggles in the area. I've abandoned many a cache hunt because I got tired of muggles, and stopped having fun. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the cache -- on a different day, at a different time, I might enjoy it a lot.

 

I have seen far, far worse.

 

I remember back when I was new, even the slightest hint of negativity or criticism bothered me. So, I know where you're coming from. You want everyone to have fun, enjoy your cache, and FIND the cache. But not everyone does that, and that's just a fact of geocaching life. You'll get used to it.

Link to comment

Leave the DNF. The guy(?) who wrote it was obviously discouraged after hunting for 45 minutes and not finding a cache placed by a newbie. His log doesn't trash the cache and it certainly doesn't contain anything personally about you, so it's best left alone. Not everyone likes every hide, that's a fact of life. The other finders seemed to think it was ok.

Edited by DocDiTTo
Link to comment

I looked at the log and found it to be a factual summary of what that geocacher saw. Complaints about tree cover are common -- that is a great excuse for a DNF. And if they saw a fire ant hill, that's what they saw. I'd appreciate that warning. And nobody has any control over muggles in the area. I've abandoned many a cache hunt because I got tired of muggles, and stopped having fun. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the cache -- on a different day, at a different time, I might enjoy it a lot.

 

I have seen far, far worse.

 

I remember back when I was new, even the slightest hint of negativity or criticism bothered me. So, I know where you're coming from. You want everyone to have fun, enjoy your cache, and FIND the cache. But not everyone does that, and that's just a fact of geocaching life. You'll get used to it.

Leprechauns makes a good point. You can use that log to your advantage by expanding your cache page a little to include the warning about where the fire ant nest is, particularly if it's not near the search area of the cache. This could be very helpful to other cachers when that log disappears off the bottom of the page.

Link to comment

I know how you feel when getting some complaints. Seems like whenever I start a new activity I begin by being overly sensitive to what people say and I read between the lines when there's really nothing else to see.

 

I myself have a cache in the location where a Northern Hawk Owl spent much of its time back in the mid 80s. Up until last year that was the only time that that species of bird had ever been recorded to have ventured as south as Iowa, or at least into Iowa. I spent many hours observing and taking notes about his "daylight" behaviors - they hunt during the day and sleep at night. To make a record of his roost I set up a cache there a couple years ago. The owl must not have had good taste since the woods are a major CITO area. I don't have the time to clean it out myself and no one else seems to care to help. Where the owl was it was. I used to get complaints about the trash until I wrote a warning on the webpage about that location not being for the "trash-o-phobic." I explained the historical significance of the area and leave it at that and no longer pay much attention to words about how messy the place is.

Link to comment

I'd leave the DNF, too. It really isn't that bad, and reading through the guys recent cache logs, it looks like that is pretty much just his style of log. I'd bet most of the locals already take that into account when they read his logs. A couple of his recent logs say he's been feeling a little under the weather lately, and in many of them he lists all the things he doesn't like about the caches.

 

He even has several finds on caches he help a friend hide (and signed the log several pages in, then waited until well after FTF to log online) where he complains mildly about things like the steep path to the cache. Since he even grouches about his friend's cache, I'd guess he is just recording his experience, and not trying to be harshly critical.

Link to comment

Everybody isn't going to love your caches. Leave the the log there. If the criticism is warranted, you will learn something. If it isn't, it just reflects poorly on the person who left the log. Sanitizing cache logs really isn't right unless there is vulgarity, or unwanted spoilers.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I'm a relatively new geocacher, but I've done enough reading of log files and forum posts to see that good manners are a large part of what makes this sport fun.

After some thoughtful searching, I set up my own cache and it was approved yesterday. Within two hours someone posted a DNF with several complaints and a statement that they didn't enjoy the site. :ph34r:

Since then, two other people have found it with relative ease and no complaints.

I don't want to be a whiner, but I'm disappointed that the first log note on my first cache is so disparaging. The only DNF I've posted was after returning to the site several times and searching thoroughly with a couple of other people. To post one quickly suggests lack of searching effort rather than a bad hide.

 

Would anyone care to give their opinion? ;)

don't sweat it, this guy complains if he finds them too. if you want, you can deleat his coments as the owner of the cache. Do Not Let This Get You Down. some people are just like this guy and by reading you're other post on that cache it looks like a good one. so what if that guy didn't find it, then wrote a mean post about it. go out and hide 3 more just like it. also check out the thread about Rude Cachers.:P;):P:blink:

Link to comment

Leave the log. There's nothing wrong with it. He mentions a couple of issues with the cache, and the muggles. Big deal.

 

If that's the worst critique you ever get on a cache you hide, you'll be doing very well indeed.

 

You do need to put in something about the fire ants, though. Sooner or later, someone's gonna get bit, and then, you're really gonna get a doozie of a log.

Link to comment

I'm with the majority here, I don't think that dnf log was inappropriate. And though it seems too soon to you for a dnf the searcher did spend 45 minutes looking for it.

 

I have a few questions. Is the hide so visible to non-cachers that the finders will be uncomfortable searching? Is it likely that the finder will be caught in the act? Is the container hidden in some cover that all looks the same such as ivy, mulch or bushes? Is the McDonalds container water resistant? These things can affect the mood of a finder.

Link to comment

The DNF just means you hid it well. It upsets us if we don't get DNF logs on our caches. Once you have a bunch of caches out, you'll be more upset when you know folks are DNFing your caches and not posting the DNF. They're my favorite type of log, both giving and receiving. You should feel honored that the first seeker spent so much time looking and left a nice long DNF log. That's way better than a find log that reads 'TNLNSL.'

 

- T of TandS

Link to comment

As far as I'm concerned there are very few reasons one would delete a log.

 

1. Fake Find

2. Foul Language or Personal Attacks.

 

I can't think of much else

 

I agree, leave it and please understand some people gripe about everything. Every area has a person that is like this and our forums have plenty of them. Like my grandmother used to say don't even listen to them if all they do is bellyache.

Link to comment

The logs are the life blood of a cache. Just because someone DNF's doesn't mean anything is wrong. Their Geo-Sense may not have been working that day. Be thankful they actually logged it.

 

It made you think about your placement and shows you have integrity. To maintain your hides you will need the feedback and over time your skin will toughen.

 

I know a cache in your area that has more DNF's logged than finds and I am one of those who DNF'd it. It has not kept it from being sought after and is still active. The cacher who owns this one is known for his hides and is well respected.

 

Remember the most important thing is for you to have fun!

 

Since you are here in Florida stop by the Florida Geocaching Association and check us out.

 

Hope to see you on the trails!

Link to comment

I don't want to be a whiner, but I'm disappointed that the first log note on my first cache is so disparaging. The only DNF I've posted was after returning to the site several times and searching thoroughly with a couple of other people. To post one quickly suggests lack of searching effort rather than a bad hide.

 

Would anyone care to give their opinion? :D

The log doesn't appear to be rude, although the searcher was frank about the fact that he wasn't enjoying it after a while, so gave up. Most people get to that point sooner or later: there's only so much fun that can be had searching in vegetation!

 

I'm pleased when a FTF attempt on one of my caches ends in a DNF. You shouldn't make the find too easy or else the cache is doomed anyway.

 

This one had 5 DNF's before being found and I was highly amused...

 

HH

Link to comment

I agree with the above post. A DNF on a new cache can be the highest compliment! We were so pleased that an experienced pair of cachers logged a DNF on our very first cache. We did our job well in hiding and they did come back again and again before being the FTF cachers. When they found it they were ecstatic and have been avid supporters of our hides ever since. Take it in stride. All indications are you did your job well in hiding and provided a real challenge for your visiting cachers. Like every cache, the greater the hide, the greater the reward in finding it. :D Congrats on placing your first cache!

Link to comment
I'm pleased when a FTF attempt on one of my caches ends in a DNF. You shouldn't make the find too easy or else the cache is doomed anyway.

 

When I place a cache and see a DNF I'm disappointed. I place my caches to be found, not to fool people. If your point is to place a challenging hide that's one thing, but in most cases I think the find should be pretty easy. It cuts down a lot on potential damage to the area.

 

I disagree that an easy cache is doomed. I try to place my caches so that they are somewhat obvious to a person who is actually looking for it, but not evident to casual passersby. It seems to work as I've only had 7 of 160+ caches go missing and some of them were probably to factors other than an accidental find.

Link to comment

I'm pretty thin skinned. If someone posted a log like that on my first cache it would have hurt my feelings too, but as others have said, don't delete the log. Most likely he was having a bad day and didn't really mean it the way it sounded to you. When someone posts a DNF on one of my caches I always email them, say I'm sorry they couldn't find my cache and give an additional hint or at least ask if they want one.

 

When I place a cache and see a DNF I'm disappointed. I place my caches to be found, not to fool people. If your point is to place a challenging hide that's one thing, but in most cases I think the find should be pretty easy. It cuts down a lot on potential damage to the area.

 

I disagree that an easy cache is doomed. I try to place my caches so that they are somewhat obvious to a person who is actually looking for it, but not evident to casual passersby. It seems to work as I've only had 7 of 160+ caches go missing and some of them were probably to factors other than an accidental find.

Ditto!

Link to comment

I felt a little bad when after much planning of my 6-26 stage You Sank My Battleship! (GCB688) by brdad (4/2) cache got a less than favoarable DNF log:

 

icon_sad.gif February 10, 2003 by Bos (227 found)

6-10 FEB 2003

Six hour quest without joy, visited all 25 sites

- Some snow slogging required

Good tour for the visitor to Bangor

- Some sites very interesting - a few mundane

Clue coordinates seem off a bit, but most close enough

- Specified WGS-84 datum was used

Unable to get definitive answers to some clues

- Alpha 2 and alpha 3 appear undefined (maybe deep under snow)

- Still, inferred probable coordinates of the final quest

Probably would not have attempted actual cache in winter anyway

- Lacks needed precision final approach guidance

- - ILS localizer and glide slope never commissioned

Downtown sites very hazardous during winter weekdays

- pedestrian hostile

- - sidewalks iced - many walking in streets amongst traffic

- - much traffic

- very limited parking

- recommend nights or Sunday

No one seemed to know what a Peavey is

- Must be lack of interest in Bangor's rich history

- Looked it up on Google

- AKA cant dog - some folks call it a peavey - I call it a cant dog

- a 'cant' being a squared timber or log

- Really, it's a cant dog with a spike on the end

- - (that ought ot clear it up)

Ya'll be careful now, Hear?

 

But now after many happy logs I laugh about it. You can't please everyone every time. I especially like the "pedestrian hostile" line.

Link to comment
I'm pleased when a FTF attempt on one of my caches ends in a DNF. You shouldn't make the find too easy or else the cache is doomed anyway.

 

When I place a cache and see a DNF I'm disappointed. I place my caches to be found, not to fool people. If your point is to place a challenging hide that's one thing, but in most cases I think the find should be pretty easy. It cuts down a lot on potential damage to the area.

I agree that it's not wise to encourage a lot of general searching. On the other hand, finding caches would get pretty dull if you always get to the location and see an obvious hide. The ideal hide IMO is accompanied by enough information to eliminate the necessity for tedious wide area or methodical searches, but not so you just go straight to it. My example was designed to be a challenging hide: several of mine are like that and I enjoy hearing about the entertainment that precedes the eventual find. So DNF's are part of the fun, at least sometimes - I just wanted to make that point to the thread starter. Perhaps I should have qualified my remark by using "I'm sometimes pleased" rather than "I'm pleased"- of course sometimes I'm worried by a DNF, if the find was meant to be straightforward.

 

My example also specifies that you can access the cache on tarmac (minimising impact on the local environment), and the hint tells you where it is to within an inch (and was there from the start).

 

I disagree that an easy cache is doomed. I try to place my caches so that they are somewhat obvious to a person who is actually looking for it, but not evident to casual passersby. It seems to work as I've only had 7 of 160+ caches go missing and some of them were probably to factors other than an accidental find.

I didn't mean that all easy caches are doomed. But if it's TOO easy (i.e. it's obvious from a significant distance away), I would expect it to be muggled sooner rather than later (at least in this part of the world where there is always an inquisitive dog or teenager nearby). I do like those that are soon found by the geocacher but will never be spotted by the muggle, but not every cache placer manages this feat!

 

HH

Link to comment

I looked at the log and found it to be a factual summary of what that geocacher saw. Complaints about tree cover are common -- that is a great excuse for a DNF. And if they saw a fire ant hill, that's what they saw. I'd appreciate that warning. And nobody has any control over muggles in the area. I've abandoned many a cache hunt because I got tired of muggles, and stopped having fun. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the cache -- on a different day, at a different time, I might enjoy it a lot.

 

I have seen far, far worse.

 

I remember back when I was new, even the slightest hint of negativity or criticism bothered me. So, I know where you're coming from. You want everyone to have fun, enjoy your cache, and FIND the cache. But not everyone does that, and that's just a fact of geocaching life. You'll get used to it.

 

What he said.

Link to comment

As the searcher in question, when I got home, treated the ant bites (which still itch like the devil) took a cold shower to cool off, and got settled in to post the log, I posted exactly what I saw.

 

log is as follows:

Took a stab at this one since I had nothing better to do, cache is under pretty decent tree cover so gps signal was quite scattered, was led to a large fern bed from different places outside the tree cover, I got spots to search over about half the bed, no luck searching, was going for a fifth angle when I found the angry fire ant mound under one of the benches, with that, I called it a day on this search. Beware of muggles in the area as well, 3 10-12 year olds kept coming back to play on the playground equipment in plain sight of the location as well.

 

after 45 minutes did not find and was not having fun.

 

let me break it down.

 

-Took a stab at this one since I had nothing better to do,

 

Just got home from work, checked email, saw that 20 minutes before a cache had been posted within 3 miles of my house, and I have a decent idea of where its hidden, behind the library.

 

-cache is under pretty decent tree cover so gps signal was quite scattered, was led to a large fern bed from different places outside the tree cover, I got spots to search over about half the bed,

 

Garmin 60cs directed me to about 10 different spots on the fern bed, the fence, the trees in the fern bed, the trees outside the fern bed, let gps sit and settle for a while, dig thru ferns more, lift up ferns, move off, try to get another idea where the cache is hidden, all while in full view of a few houses across the road about 300 feet away, and about 70 feet from large glass windows on the back of the library, and about 50 feet from playground equipment. It is hard to be stealthy when you are digging thru ferns and sweating like a pig.

 

-was going for a fifth angle when I found the angry fire ant mound under one of the benches

 

Went to sit on the bench for a few minutes to calm down, and hope that my gps can mabye give me another place to search, and I start getting bitten by fireants, end up pulling off my shoes, smashing the little nasties, and decide to head home to wash off the dirt from being on my knees digging thru the ferns, treat the fireant bites, and take a shower.

 

-with that, I called it a day on this search. Beware of muggles in the area as well, 3 10-12 year olds kept coming back to play on the playground equipment in plain sight of the location as well.

 

A note to other cachers that this is a public place that does have pretty steady traffic on the nearby road, inside the library, and kids playing on the playground equipment close to the cache.

 

----------------

I could have mentioned in the cache log that if it is hidden in the ferns, that eager searchers will cause damage to the plant life as well. I could have mentioned the big window nearby, and the fact that you are searching within a few feet of someone's backyard fence.

 

I was also finally getting over the cold I had until yesterday, and wasn't feeling all that spectacular, and even reading it over now, its not meant to be rude at all, only factual.

 

And since you are a new geocacher, instead of logging DNFNHF, I wrote out the words incase you weren't familiar with the term.

 

And when I searched, there wasn't a hint saying not in the ferns, thank you for updating that on the cache page

Edited by norsehawk
Link to comment

I don't want to be a whiner, but I'm disappointed that the first log note on my first cache is so disparaging. The only DNF I've posted was after returning to the site several times and searching thoroughly with a couple of other people. To post one quickly suggests lack of searching effort rather than a bad hide.

 

 

If you hunted for this one several times, don't you owe several DNF's?

Link to comment

Here is a link to a DNF that I had in June. You have to read all the logs from the beginning. There is only 8 or 9. A number of people have commented on how civil this DNF started out and then got resolved.

 

Several people could have been upset, considering how remote this place is, but we all took it in stride and considered it a learning experience. Even the Cache Owner did not get upset. It started out with the coordinates being quite a bit off. We all enjoyed looking for the cache, even the people that did not find it. I was particullay aggressive about this one because it was so close to me and I knew I could get there by land not in a canoe.

 

Moshannon Falls Rafting Point

Link to comment

I'm a relatively new geocacher, but I've done enough reading of log files and forum posts to see that good manners are a large part of what makes this sport fun.

After some thoughtful searching, I set up my own cache and it was approved yesterday. Within two hours someone posted a DNF with several complaints and a statement that they didn't enjoy the site. :lol:

Since then, two other people have found it with relative ease and no complaints.

I don't want to be a whiner, but I'm disappointed that the first log note on my first cache is so disparaging. The only DNF I've posted was after returning to the site several times and searching thoroughly with a couple of other people. To post one quickly suggests lack of searching effort rather than a bad hide.

 

Would anyone care to give their opinion? :laughing:

 

I have had comments like that, followed by positive ones. I have never seen fit to edit or delete a log - the finder (or nonfinder as the case may be) is within rights to write their opinion, after all. In some cases these comments have moved me to clarify a passage on the cache page or add a note. Maybe I am thick-skinned, but even "bad" criticism can be edifying.

 

(edited to add comments I should have added when I originally posted)

Edited by OHMIKY
Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...