Jump to content

"Didn't Find It" logs


Recommended Posts

Just curious, if you set out to find a cache and don't... do you always log it as "did not find"? In my first ten searches, there have been a few that we didn't find. There's been one we found on the second try, and one that I searched for twice and still haven't found. Most of these I expect I haven't found because I'm still new at this and just may not be "seeing" it.

 

So I was just curious, for the one I visited twice in two days and didn't find, should I be logging "did not find's" for those visits?

 

So far we've only logged the actual "finds" because I fully expect (with some repeat visits) to find the others.

 

Driver Carries Cache

(madmike)

Link to comment

Just curious, if you set out to find a cache and don't... do you always log it as "did not find"? In my first ten searches, there have been a few that we didn't find. There's been one we found on the second try, and one that I searched for twice and still haven't found. Most of these I expect I haven't found because I'm still new at this and just may not be "seeing" it.

 

So I was just curious, for the one I visited twice in two days and didn't find, should I be logging "did not find's" for those visits?

 

So far we've only logged the actual "finds" because I fully expect (with some repeat visits) to find the others.

 

Driver Carries Cache

(madmike)

 

I generally only log them if;

1. I beleive the cache is missing

2. It was a memorable trip anyway

 

This is because I can't imagine anyone would care that I didn't find it unless 1 or 2 (above)

Edited by Team Cyberlove
Link to comment
Just curious, if you set out to find a cache and don't... do you always log it as "did not find"?

 

Yes, I always log my DNFs.

 

So I was just curious, for the one I visited twice in two days and didn't find, should I be logging "did not find's" for those visits?

 

Yes you should always log your DNFs (see below)

 

This is because I can't imagine anyone would care that I didn't find it unless 1 or 2

 

The cache owner cares. First off you don't KNOW if its missing or not. A pattern of DNFs will let the owner know that either the cache is more difficult that he rated it, or that he needs to go out there and check on the cache. If people aren't logging their DNFs the owner will not have this information, or it will take longer for him to obtain it.

 

If I see 2-3 consecutive DNFs for one of my caches it means there might be a problem. So if Cacher A comes along and doesn't log a DNF, Cacher B does, and Cacher C doesn't, as far as I know as an owner is that there is 1 DNF, when in reality there were 3. I really should be out there checking on the cache, but I won't because I only know about the 1 DNF.

 

Also if people are not logging their DNFs, I will look at the logs and assume that my 1 star difficulty rating is correct. If I see DNFs sprinkled through the logs I'll know that I should raise the difficulty a bit.

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

Generally, if I get out of my car and don't find the cache (for whatever reason) I'll log a DNF.

 

If I get to ground zero and don't make the find, I'll definitely log a DNF.

 

It doesn't matter if I intend to look for it again or if I have made multiple attempts. However, on some occasions, I have returned to the location to just give it a few more minutes searching and have not logged a DNF. I really should go ahead and log DNFs for those failed searches.

Link to comment
This is because I can't imagine anyone would care that I didn't find it unless 1 or 2

 

The cache owner cares. First off you don't KNOW if its missing or not. A pattern of DNFs will let the owner know that either the cache is more difficult that he rated it, or that he needs to go out there and check on the cache. If people aren't logging their DNFs the owner will not have this information, or it will take longer for him to obtain it.

 

If I see 2-3 consecutive DNFs for one of my caches it means there might be a problem. So if Cacher A comes along and doesn't log a DNF, Cacher B does, and Cacher C doesn't, as far as I know as an owner is that there is 1 DNF, when in reality there were 3. I really should be out there checking on the cache, but I won't because I only know about the 1 DNF.

 

Also if people are not logging their DNFs, I will look at the logs and assume that my 1 star difficulty rating is correct. If I see DNFs sprinkled through the logs I'll know that I should raise the difficulty a bit.

 

The way *I* go about it I think my 2 guidelines usually cover when this would be useful information (I'm very stubborn so practically all my DNFs are memorable, and I do take patterns of DNFs into account when deciding if I think a cache might be gone), but you're right, I can't be 100% sure if it's there or not when I don't find it. Perhaps I should be more stringent in my DNF logging. I never thought about how useful it might be.

Link to comment

I used to log one DNF for each serious attempt I made on a cache. But there was one cache where I ended up logging 4 or 5 DNFs in a row, with no other attempts by any other cachers logged in between mine. I thought that would be unfair to the cache owner ... if you didn't read the logs carefully, you might think there were 4 or 5 different cachers that failed, as opposed to one blind stupid one.

 

To prevent that situation in the future, if I've already logged a DNF I won't log another DNF until someone else has logged a find.

 

And as a cache owner, I agree with the other posters - I *need* people to log DNFs to tell me when I need to go fix something.

Link to comment

I always log my DNF's. If I go to look for a cache, and for whatever reason I can not log a find, I will always log a DNF. It happened to me more than once, where I could not get to ground zero. One time I couldn't find the right trail, another I came from the wrong side of a river and couldn't cross it, another I aborted because it was almost dark and I didn't have a flashlight, no matter what the case I log a DNF. In those three cases I never even got close enough to actually start looking, but I still logged them, because I went out to look for them and didn't find them. My most extreme case was just last weekend. I was driving around and couldn't find a suitable parking location, so I left. Even though I didn't actually start the hike, and didn't even start looking, I still logged that cache as a DNF, because I set out to look for it, and came back empty handed.

Whatever reason you have for not finding the cache, I find that it could be helpful to future cachers, so i always post a DNF. Just my take on it from a hiders and finders point of view.

Link to comment
... My most extreme case was just last weekend. I was driving around and couldn't find a suitable parking location, so I left. Even though I didn't actually start the hike, and didn't even start looking, I still logged that cache as a DNF, because I set out to look for it, and came back empty handed. ...
In this case, i might log it as a note. I've gone both ways on it, in the past.

 

Definitely if I didn't get to the parking area before I aborted (for a reason unrelated to the cache), I would not log a DNF.

Link to comment

I definitely believe people should log their DNFs. When I first started caching I reluctantly logged it as it was sort of a personal failure to me if I didn't find a cache, but now I log them without hesitation.

 

The log option is there for a reason and it should be used. I think there are too many people out there that don't log their DNFs. Basically if I attempt to find it and I don't find it, whether it's a minute or an hour of searching, I log the DNF. Then pur a detailed enough description as to why I didn't find it or about the adventure.

Link to comment
I was driving around and couldn't find a suitable parking location, so I left.

Both DNF's and notes are suitable for that scenario. Heck, some folks would've claimed a "Find". My traditional rule of thumb is, if I actually searched, but couldn't locate it, I log a DNF. If for some reason I couldn't search, (muggles/no parking/wrong trail/etc), I log a note.

Link to comment

this is interesting, because as a new-b myself, i was wondering the same thing. i personally have logged a few dnf's, but only one was because we were out there searching and could not physically find it. the other was a little different in that we couldn't even figure out how to get within a mile of the darn thing. i logged a dnf for that too, but went back later and after driving in circles for an hour, i finally figured it out. that said, i am not sure if i shoulda logged a dnf because the cache was there and in good condition. so there is my confusion. i guess i just put it out there for comment, because i still haven't made up my mind on when i personally HAVEN'T FOUND IT.

Link to comment

I log a DNF only after I've spent a minimum of 5 minutes at the exact GPS coords, after I've read and digested the hint (where neccesary) and after checking and re-checking the last 5 posts of the cache finds.

 

If I still come up dry, I try not to spend too long at the location (ususally time is not on my side) and make a note to log a detailed DNF.

Link to comment

Some of our most memorable logs have been DNF's. Of course you should log them all. They are part of the cache's history. :)

 

Here, here, we must agree wholeheartedly! The DNFs are some of the most interesting logs we've ever read or written. It's really a mark in your own caching diary that's just as important as the finds. A smiley after 3 consecutive dnfs on one cache is a great story just waiting to be told. Like anything in life, if it comes along easy it's far less likely to be valued compared to something you try and fail at numerous times before rising to glory (or at least logging a find :( ) The reward is in the journey, not the destination. :)

 

edit for to spell ;)

Edited by fox-and-the-hound
Link to comment

I always log my DNF's. If I go to look for a cache, and for whatever reason I can not log a find, I will always log a DNF. It happened to me more than once, where I could not get to ground zero. One time I couldn't find the right trail, another I came from the wrong side of a river and couldn't cross it, another I aborted because it was almost dark and I didn't have a flashlight, no matter what the case I log a DNF. In those three cases I never even got close enough to actually start looking, but I still logged them, because I went out to look for them and didn't find them. My most extreme case was just last weekend. I was driving around and couldn't find a suitable parking location, so I left. Even though I didn't actually start the hike, and didn't even start looking, I still logged that cache as a DNF, because I set out to look for it, and came back empty handed.

Whatever reason you have for not finding the cache, I find that it could be helpful to future cachers, so i always post a DNF. Just my take on it from a hiders and finders point of view.

 

That is similar to the criteria I use. If I put the waypoint in my GPS and hit GO TO and do not come up with the cache, I log a DNF.

 

Others will wait until they reach area around ground zero before they log a DNF.

 

Neither method is wrong, just personal preference.

Link to comment
this is interesting, because as a new-b myself, i was wondering the same thing. i personally have logged a few dnf's, but only one was because we were out there searching and could not physically find it. the other was a little different in that we couldn't even figure out how to get within a mile of the darn thing. i logged a dnf for that too, but went back later and after driving in circles for an hour, i finally figured it out. that said, i am not sure if i shoulda logged a dnf because the cache was there and in good condition. so there is my confusion. i guess i just put it out there for comment, because i still haven't made up my mind on when i personally HAVEN'T FOUND IT.
The simplest test is that you should log a DNF if you looked for it, but didn't find it. It's kind of a personal decision as to when 'looking for it' starts. Some believe that it starts when you hit <goto>. Others believe it starts when you get to ground zero. Edited by sbell111
Link to comment

Some of our most memorable logs have been DNF's. Of course you should log them all. They are part of the cache's history. :(

 

Personally, I think this is one of the coolest parts of geocaching, that the caches become these little pieces of shared history. I've only hunted a couple caches, but I log DNF.

 

-Sam

Link to comment

G'day

 

As personal rule I log all my DNF. In doing so, I also explain why I did not find the cache ... e.g., too many muggles, ran out of time, searched and searched but couldn't find it, found the remenants of the cache etc. I try to give the owner an idea of my experience so that they can tie it with others experiences and decide what action if any is required.

 

Regards

Andrew

Link to comment

(this topic comes up every so often).

 

My rule is:

 

*If I am not able to make an effort to find it (ie, don't leave my vehicle, muggles in the area, etc), at the most I might leave a note.

 

*If I make an effort to find, but am not successful, I will leave a DNF. If I feel more info may be useful (may speak of my attempts to find, etc), will add this in.

 

*If subsequent attempts are also DNF, I may or may not log them. If I come to the exact same spot, maybe not, if another, maybe yes.

 

DNFs are important for ALL of us, which is why I am annoyed that some don't log them.

 

* as a FINDER, logging DNFs makes it easier for me to pull up previous failures, see if there have been subsequent successes or any updated info before I retry.

 

* also, as a FINDER, OTHER's DNFs make it easier for me to determine if there are problems with the cache, which may lead me to NOT waste my time looking, until I see successes or updated info. A lot of DNFs is a bad sign.

 

* as an OWNER, logged DNFs may indicate a problem. Maybe the cache has been muggled, or the info is bad (bad coords- it happens, bad hints/info).

Link to comment

I definitely log all my DNFs. My criteria is very similar to Briansnat's. If I pull up the coords and hit enter (no goto on a Lowrance), and I don't find the cache, then I log the DNF (unless I'm driving and just change my mind about looking for that one).

 

There is nothing more satisfying than proudly claiming that smiley after 1 (or 2) DNFs. So far, I've gone 0 fer 2 and found the cache on the 3rd try a couple of times, but have never gone 0 fer 3.

Link to comment

If we get to "ground zero" (or at least THINK we did, on one occasion we screwed up on the math of a multi/offset per the cache owner) and don't find it we always post a DNF! Useful to the cache owner and good for others to know that it's not necessarily going to be a "park and grab" for them (not that most caches should be in our view, our best DNF's involved "finding" a new semi-local park or scenic view we never knew of otherwise, including one just yesterday which led to a great playground for the kids just 3 miles from our home)! <_< ).

 

But if a trip to a cache got sidetracked well before Ground Zero, I don't think the cache owner or the other "players" care that our 5 or 3 year old had a meltdown halfway to the cache, or that our car broke down, or that we got caught in a sudden thunderstorm driving to the cache and turned around. To us "Do Not Find" means you think you got there and didn't end up with the cache in your hands.

Link to comment

I don't care if you log it as a 'note' or a DNF or even an e-mail to the owner, but one of those things should be done every time you can't find a cache. It might save both you and people that come after you a lot of aggravation because it greatly increases the chances of the owner discovering it is missing.

 

The only time I don't log a DNF is if I already posted a DNF; The owner verified it was there; and I posted a second DNF. At that point the DNFs get a little useless and redundant.

Link to comment

A good example of why DNFs are important to the cache hider came up for me today. I had the following logs for one of my caches (a 3-mile 7-stage multi (6 virtual plus a real final)): found, found, DNF, DNF, found, found. And I had visited the final stage twice in that time frame.

 

I was puzzled by the DNFs - the information on the virtuals was supposed to be the relatively hard-to-collect part, the final stage was supposed to be a gimme. When I heard a verbal DNF from another cacher who hadn't logged it, I began to suspect something might be odd.

 

I went back and checked the final coords and found that I was off by 40 feet. The ones who had actually found it were just dilligent enough in their searching to come across it ... either that, or they experienced the same GPS errors I did by pure luck. Nobody ever said that the final coordinates seemed a bit off.

 

So even a few DNFs mixed in with finds can be useful information.

Link to comment

I don't care for the practice as it changes the "history" of the cache, but to each his own. Each hunt is a seperate entity in my book, and therefor, worthy of it's own log. As an owner, I've found that when someone changes a DNF to a find, I don't get the traditional notification E-mail telling me about it. All I get is the original DNF.

Link to comment

Please log DNFs. As a Newbie caching with small -sometimes impatient-kids, I read the log entries to be sure the cache is "findable" as opposed to "found after 30 minutes searching at ground zero. Covered up even better for next finder."

 

I didnt log my first attempt at a cache, but my GPS wasn't fully initialized and I was still trying to figure out how it worked. Now I log all my DNFs.

Link to comment
I didn't know you could change a post from "not found" to "found". Anyone have any thoughts on this approach? I'm sending it again to the folks who have caches placed.

When I first started, I used to delete my DNFs when I finally found the cache. I was obsessive about trying to find every single cache I went after, so I'd use my DNFs as a list of work I needed to finish.

 

I stopped relatively soon after that, when I discovered bookmarks and when I came to the realization that I just wasn't going to find every single cache I set out to find. Now I just mark caches on my Want To Find list instead of deleting the DNFs. Still lets me accomplish the same thing but without skewing the history of the caches I attempt.

Link to comment
Anyone have any thoughts on this approach?

 

this approach being editing your DNF to a Found it!

 

Yes, my thoughts are that you rob the cache owner of notification (as Clan Riffster has noted, the cache owner and cache watchers receive no notice when you edit your log), and cachers of the cache history. Your DNF may be a helpful indicator of cache difficulty. You also rob yourself of your own caching history, unless you're keeping some separate record. And this is a technique I've notice being used by those who love their find count more than reality, logging a DNF, then coming back later and altering it to a find...

Link to comment

I log all of my DNFs and if I get to try again, then I change my DNF to a Found It. -BK <_<

 

I didn't know you could change a post from "not found" to "found". Anyone have any thoughts on this approach? I'm sending it again to the folks who have caches placed.

 

Driver Carries Cache

(madmike)

 

I don't like it for a number of reasons. First off as an owner I don't get a notification of the find, so unless I happen to look at the cache page I won't know about the recent find.

 

It also tampers with the history of the cache. DNFs are useful information for searchers as well as owners. For example if I'm looking for a cache that has nothing but Found It logs, I'll assume it should be pretty easy. If I don't find it in a few minutes I'll give up, thinking that it is probably gone. Now if I see DNF logs sprinkled among the cache logs I'll realize that it isn't a slam dunk find and will search longer for the cache.

Link to comment

I log all of my DNFs and if I get to try again, then I change my DNF to a Found It. -BK :blink:

 

I didn't know you could change a post from "not found" to "found". Anyone have any thoughts on this approach? I'm sending it again to the folks who have caches placed.

 

Driver Carries Cache

(madmike)

 

I log a DNF for any cache that I look for and can't find. I find them very useful when deciding whether or not to go for a particular cache. My intent is to always get back sometime and actually find it. Once I do, I log the Find and edit my original log to a Note. This allows me to go to my account details and view my DNF's as a list of caches I need to return to. I don't change the content of the original DNF log, I just change it to a Note. Anyone else do this?

Link to comment

I agree with the recent posts that you shouldn't simply change your DNF log to a found log.

 

As an owner, your DNF log may prompt me to go check on my cache. Because you didn't create a new log to let me know that you found it, I don't get notified, so I won't know that you went back and it turned out everything was okay, that you couldn't believe you overlooked that spot the first time you were there.

 

If that particular cache is 30 miles from my home on a mountain, I might waste 60 miles driving and an hour hiking to a investigate a potentially missing cache that, it turns out, was there all along.

 

That would annoy me more than a little!

Link to comment

Speaking as a cache owner, I do want DNF's logged, for all the reasons stated. Both of my caches are in the mountains in a National Forest. I don't want a DNF logged if the area is closed (or you can't make it) due to bad weather. That would be equal in my mind to logging a DNF because you couldn't find a place to park. I only want them logged if you actually looked for it. Also, as a owner I don't want DNF's changed to Finds.

 

As a seeker, I would like DNF's logged. If all logs are finds, I'll spend more time looking than I would if the last 50% of the logs are DNF's.

 

I always log DNF's if I actually look for a cache. One exception was last month looking for one locally that require a hike. About 300' from where it was supposed to be my GPS died in the middle of the woods. Since it was pitch dark my G/F and I headed back to the car. In that case we didn't log DNF's because we never made it close to the cache. (IMO 300' isn't "close" in the woods in the dark)

Link to comment

It kinda makes me angry that some folks wont admit to a DNF. ( yes I sure do, Im almost to 200 now! MUCH more interesting then being FTF!) Most of my caches are not THAT difficult....and I have had people personally tell me they looked for such and such so many times but couldnt find it, and in the time between my cache gone missing and me getting this news, other folks look for it. Look, I try to check on my caches as best as I can, so maybe that makes me a bad cacher for placing so many! But as soon as I get 2-3 DNFs on a cache I am there to check it out. Even 1 DNF if im in the area.

And as a hider, I do have a few difficult ones, and the fun for me IS the DNFS. WEll, ok, the finds too, but I purpously made these challenging, what is the shame in admitting a DNF? Isnt that part of the game? Come on, let me have fun, but give me the heads up to check on the cache as well. Its not like there will be a medal awarded to the cacher that has no DNFs logged.

Off my box.

Link to comment

I consider myself as a newbie as well, but I do log any DNFs as well. Anytime I feel I get close to the site, I plan to log it (unless a reason exists that would have meaning to other cachers or owners such as Bridge out, Tree down, Park temporary closed etc. I would log those as well). It a challenge to myself that If I log a DNF and don't hear anything I want to make another attempt. Prior notes help me to recall the previous hunts and might give me hints on where I went wrong. This is especially true if someone else has found it in the meantime or if the owner has checked on it or repaired something about it then I know its time for a re-hunt.)

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...
×
×
  • Create New...