+TheManInStripes Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
+Cardinal Red Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 B. Create a brand new log to log the find and leave the old DNF log alone. It's part of your history. And we ALL have DNF's. Quote Link to comment
+Too Tall John Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
AbercrombieHollister Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 B. Create a brand new log to log the find and leave the old DNF log alone. It's part of your history. And we ALL have DNF's. Excally that. Just make a new one saying it was your second attemp here and you funally found. =] Quote Link to comment
+Knight2000 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 B. Create a brand new log to log the find and leave the old DNF log alone. It's part of your history. And we ALL have DNF's. Exactly. Quote Link to comment
+andGuest Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
+Moving Glass Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 I let the DNF stand,and relog the find. Quote Link to comment
+StarBrand Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Option B. You looked - you did not find = a DNF You looked - you found = a found log 2 entirely seperate events both well worth logging. Quote Link to comment
+TrailGators Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 (edited) 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! Edited May 30, 2007 by TrailGators Quote Link to comment
+scavok Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 I have plenty of DNFs, but I don't add a log for a new DNF, I update it with the latest date and continue the story of my hunt. When I do find it I add a new log as a Found. Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
Dinoprophet Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
+Totem Clan Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Different day, different hunt, same cache; B. Create a brand new log to log the find and leave the old DNF log alone. For me, how else could I do it? Plus what briansnat and Dinoprophet said. Quote Link to comment
GPS-Hermit Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
+DudleyGrunt Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 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". Quote Link to comment
+Markwell Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
+Miragee Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 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 . . . Quote Link to comment
+DanOCan Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 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! Quote Link to comment
+Lotho Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 B. Create a brand new log to log the find and leave the old DNF log alone. Everytime. =D Quote Link to comment
+Lotho Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 (edited) Sorry, website decided to throw a hissy fit =P Edited May 30, 2007 by Lotho Quote Link to comment
+markz68 Posted May 30, 2007 Share Posted May 30, 2007 Like the majority of the answers... option B for me. Quote Link to comment
+Mocadeki Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 Option B but when we first started caching we'd do A. Quote Link to comment
+Rev Mike Posted May 31, 2007 Share Posted May 31, 2007 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 Quote Link to comment
+DudleyGrunt Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 I've now reverted all of my DNF notes back to actual DNF logs and am going to start using a bookmark list to keep track of my outstanding DNF's. Quote Link to comment
+TeamFROG Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 We use option B, though my kids would love the first option. Quote Link to comment
+TreeSqueezers Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 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. Quote Link to comment
+HaLiJuSaPa Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 We leave the DNF log and do a new Found It log. We've had quite a few of these, including a couple where we had posted 2 DNF logs. Quote Link to comment
+poohstickz Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 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? Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.