Jump to content

From DNF to found


Followers 3

Recommended Posts

If you go looking for a cache and end up logging a Did Not Find, and then later you find the log, which way to you log your find?

 

Do you:

 

A. Go back and edit or change your old log to a FOUND IT log?

 

B. Create a brand new log to log the find and leave the old DNF log alone.

 

C. Something else -- please elaborate.

Link to comment
If you go looking for a cache and end up logging a Did Not Find, and then later you find the log, which way to you log your find?

 

Do you:

 

A. Go back and edit or change your old log to a FOUND IT log?

 

B. Create a brand new log to log the find and leave the old DNF log alone.

 

C. Something else -- please elaborate.

As it is a different visit on a different day, I let the old "DNF" stand and log a seperate "Found" log.
Link to comment

B.

 

If i changed the old DNF it would be inaccurate. Also there would be no log of the DNF to help other cachers and the owner to know how to rate it.

 

On rare instances if our caching is cut short because of daylight or something and we come back the next day to finish then we dont log the first DNF. (Unless when we finish looking on day 2 we still cant find it.) This doesn't happen very often though.

Link to comment

I will pile on with answer B.

 

There are a few cachers around me that do not post DNF until they search 3,4 or5 times. When they go back and finally find it they then change the DNF to found it. I have not hidden many caches but if they due that on one of mine I would erase there found it log. To me if it is not important enough to log a DNF then it is not important enought to log a found it either. Not trying to start anything by any means but I am expecting to see the little yellow guy eating popcorn coming up soon.

Link to comment

I use method B. A log for each visit and result.

 

There are several reasons that method A (and Trail Gator's variation) is not preferrable. First, the owner doesn't receive notification of the find. It could cause more work on the part of the owner. For instance if your DNF causes the owner to decde to plan a visit to check on his cache he will not see your subsequent "Found It" unless he pulls up the cache page. So if you find it a few days later and just edit your log, the owner may unecessarily head out to check on the cache.

 

Second, those frownie faces are important info for your fellow geocachers. If I look at a cache page and see nothing but smileys on the page I will assume it should be a slam dunk, easy find. If I don't come up with the cache in a few minutes I will figure that it's gone and call off the hunt. Now if I see frownie faces sprinkled among the logs I'll know that I may have to put more effort into the search.

Link to comment

I use method B. A log for each visit and result.

 

There are several reasons that method A (and Trail Gator's variation) is not preferrable. First, the owner doesn't receive notification of the find. It could cause more work on the part of the owner. For instance if your DNF causes the owner to decde to plan a visit to check on his cache he will not see your subsequent "Found It" unless he pulls up the cache page. So if you find it a few days later and just edit your log, the owner may unecessarily head out to check on the cache.

 

Second, those frownie faces are important info for your fellow geocachers. If I look at a cache page and see nothing but smileys on the page I will assume it should be a slam dunk, easy find. If I don't come up with the cache in a few minutes I will figure that it's gone and call off the hunt. Now if I see frownie faces sprinkled among the logs I'll know that I may have to put more effort into the search.

I'll add two more points to that. Expanding on the first point, anyone watching the cache will also not see the change.

 

Also, if others logged the cache between your visits, the chronology of the logs is off -- either your DNF or your Found is dated incorrectly.

 

I use option B.

Link to comment

I say do a new one when you finally found it. It keeps the log straight and help other cache know they are not the only ones with DNF. The emails go out correctly and the owner can judge his hide based on what is happening. Talk about the DNF find to be informative, but don't influence what others will do.

Link to comment

C. Something else

 

I log the find as a completely new log, however, I then change my DNF to a note with the original text intact. I've posted this before in a similar thread and know that folks will think it's pointless or whatever, but it is what I do.

 

The reason I do this is so that when I look at "My Account Details > Geocaches > Didn't Find It", I only see the caches I still haven't found. I know I could build a bookmark list or a PQ, but this seems more direct.

 

I don't really think it adversely affects the cache owner or other cachers, since the info is still on the page. Also, if I log a find after my original DNF, it is obvious that the cache is in place.

 

Can't believe I'm the only one to answer "C".

Link to comment

I used do a slightly different version of A if I later found that same cache. I keep my DNF words and I add the rest of my adventure to the same log and make it a found log. That way the entire adventure is together! No history is lost! :(

 

The owner never gets notification via e-mail that you changed your log. :(

Link to comment

I don't change my DNF. If I find the cache later, I log "Found It." Any cache I get a DNF on is put on my "As-Yet-Unresolved DNFs" Bookmark List," so I get the logs when other people find the cache I couldn't find . . . :(

 

By not changing the DNF, I can see how many DNFs I have had . . . a number that is equal to almost 10% of the caches I have looked for . . . :(

Link to comment

B

 

I have logged both a DNF and a Find on the same cache just an hour apart from each other. I treat every visit to the cache as a new event worthy of a new log. Heck, if I end up visiting a cache I have already found for some reason I'll log it as a Note.

 

People who do not log DNFs frustrate me sometimes because I think they are doing a disservice to their fellow cachers. I cringe every time I read a "Found It" log that says something like "Finally found it on my third attempt" if there aren't corresponding DNF logs, more so if it is on a cache I own.

 

As a cache owner I want to know every time someone visits one of my caches: Find, DNF, good, bad or ugly!

Link to comment

I log all my DNFs. It is my favorite stat. If you don't have enough DNF logs you are not caching enough and sometimes it is just really amusing. I will log one for everytime I look for a cache and don't sign the log. If I get out of the car and decide for some reason not to look it is still a DNF. If the cache is missing still a DNF. In the last week I looked for two that were gone when I looked and archived by the time I went to log my DNF. I still find the listing to log my DNF. There is actually one really tough cache that I had 8 DNFs on before finding and I still go back now to try and find it for fun. I have four DNF logs posted since my find.

 

- Rev Mike

Link to comment

C. Something else

 

I log the find as a completely new log, however, I then change my DNF to a note with the original text intact. I've posted this before in a similar thread and know that folks will think it's pointless or whatever, but it is what I do.

 

The reason I do this is so that when I look at "My Account Details > Geocaches > Didn't Find It", I only see the caches I still haven't found. I know I could build a bookmark list or a PQ, but this seems more direct.

 

I don't really think it adversely affects the cache owner or other cachers, since the info is still on the page. Also, if I log a find after my original DNF, it is obvious that the cache is in place.

 

Can't believe I'm the only one to answer "C".

 

I was an option b-er until I saw this entry. It appears to me to have the best of both worlds. An actual recording and notifying log entry for the "DNF" and "Found it" and an epilogue to the DNF for log readers.

Link to comment

The first visit to the cache was a not found and is recorded by a DNF. Subsequent visits, if they do not find the cache are separate DNF logs too. A DNF is not a sign of a bad cacher, it's an honest statement at a point in time. If, and when, the cache is found then that merits a found log, but only then.

 

The previous entries are part of the cache's history. One can understand amending (as in adding) them with information that might be pertinent to subsequent visitors, however changing their status, rewriting the story, or deleting them also rewrites the chronological status history of the cache. I realise that there are many ways one can rationalise changing those actions but, then, we're most likely back to the age-old question regarding numbers aren't we?

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 3
×
×
  • Create New...