Jump to content

"Did Not Finds" ?


Followers 1

Recommended Posts

Here is the deal... we are relatively new to geocaching... and have the basics down pat and love it! We have found around 60 and hidden 10. There have been times that we have looked for a "1" cache but were unable to locate... in reading the description it had been quite some time since it had been found. We emailed the owners for assurance that the cache was still in place, but not for hints. We planned to log a DNF if the owner told us that the cache was in place, however we received no response. We realize there is no shame in a DNF but want it to be fair. We want to know what your opinion is of how we log our DNFs.

Link to comment

DNF logs can do various things:

 

-- inform the cache owner of possible problems, including a missing cache

 

-- inform the cache owner and future seekers that the cache is more difficult than expected

 

-- inform everyone that people are interested in the cache

 

-- give you a chance to tell your story of the day

 

-- provide a record of who has sought the cache and why

 

-- let people know that you are honest about your failed attempts, making it more likely that they will take you seriously when you say something is really wrong

 

Some people get the impression that the only reason to log a DNF is the first item in the list. That just ain't so. Most cache owners do not equate DNF to "I think it's missing", and you should not make this mistake with the caches you hide.

 

When I log a DNF, I try to include some information about my attempt. If it was late in the day and getting dark and I was tired and only looked for a couple of minutes, I say so. If conditions were great and I looked for half an hour but it was only the third cache I'd sought, I say so. If others have posted thoughts on a possible missing cache, I add to that if I can. Etc. Put my DNF in context and provide information ... either about the cache or about me.

 

Edward

Link to comment

If I look and I don't find it, I log a DNF (almost at my 100th!!). I will log a DNF every time I search and don't find, even if it's 10 times on the same cache (and, no... that has never happened :huh:). If I really think the cache is missing, I contact the owner or state it in my DNF log. If I don't hear back from the owner after a sufficient amount of time and a couple emails and it has been a fair amount of time since a valid find, I log a "needs maintenance" or "needs archived", depending on the details of the situation. The latter is fairly rare.

Link to comment

no shame in a DNF but want it to be fair. We want to know what your opinion is of how we log our DNFs.

 

Some owners have filters and/or do not look at emails that come through the website. Therefore, you did them and other cachers a disservice by not logging you DNF. What if 5 other people did the same thing as you (probably 2 or 3 did) and now there should be 6 DNFs. Don't do what others do and wait to they are absolutely sure it is not there or they search 4 or5 times before posting a DNF.

 

In another similar log I wrote something to the effect: Do you ever find a cache and not post a found it log? Well if not then when you DO NOT FIND it when you look then log it with the same enthusiasm. I log them even if I can only search a minute or 2 (muggles, uncomfortable, etc). Why? because I looked for it and if I found it in the same amount of time I would log the smiley.

 

I am approaching 2400 finds and have over 400 DNFs. So what? I guess I must suck at geocaching.

Link to comment

I think you should log the DNF on the cache you didn't find, whether or not the owners ever get back to you. Your DNF is warning to the next guy that it may not be there, or may be hard to find, and is a piece of evidence for the owner (or reviewer) to suggest that the cache may be missing.

 

If you go to look for the cache, and have a reasonable search, and don't find it, log the DNF.

 

We didn't log DNFs for the caches we didn't find the first day we went out, when we realized our GPSr was junk and didn't get a signal at all the whole time. We didn't get to do a proper hunt, so we didn't log at all that day. Some people would log a DNF for that, but in that case, it didn't make sense to us. The fact that we couldn't find it without the proper tools would not be useful information to anyone. Similarly if you got to the parking area, got out of the car, twisted your ankle and called the hunt off, I wouldn't bother (unless you want to tell the story -- they are some of the best logs).

 

But when we went back with a proper GPSr and found one and not another, we did log the DNF. Turns out the cache was not there. So, it wasn't "our fault" that we didn't find it, but our DNF was part of a chain that led the owner to go check on and eventually replace the cache. It's not about what's "fair" to your statistics, it's about providing a record of what has happened. If you went out and looked for a cache, and didn't find it, lot it as such.

Edited by GreenMountainTreasureHunters
Link to comment

I log DNFs only when we gave it the search a proper effort. I track our DNFs with pride and list the DNF milestones on our profile right in with the other significant events. We are rapidly approaching our 200th DNF where a container was in place but we got skunked. Some of my best logs have been for DNFs.

 

I don't log DNFs if I am feeling lazy and only give a half-hearted effort. Five minutes spent searching for a micro in a lousy location when I don't really want to look anyway doesn't need to be mentioned. I think that is a waste of cache log space. My lazy DNF will knock someone else's Found It of the five recent logs list and that knocked-off log might contain information important to the next seeker.

 

If I give up before I even get to the site I won't log a DNF unless there is an interesting story to tell.

 

We have a 7.85% DNF rate where containers are in place and about 10% when missing container sites are included.

Link to comment

Ditto what paleolith said.

 

We've got 1585 finds and 165 DNFs as of this afternoon. This afternoon, we logged our third DNF in three years for the same cache and each time it turns out the cache has been missing. Over half our DNFs have been for caches that turned out to be missing. We've had cache owners thank us for logging our DNF so they knew there might be a problem.

 

Every cache attempt is logged by us with a found it, didn't find it, needs maintenance or note log, depending on the circumstances, and we wish all attempts on our caches would be logged with the same diligence.

Link to comment

By all means report a DNF if you spent some time looking. Add some detail as well.

 

Here's a sample ( VISIT LINK ) of a cache which shows that several experienced cachers have looked but not found.... with the ever shrinking dollar and the ever rising gas prices, it reduces waste if there are legitimate reports on a cache that may just be gone or wrong.

Link to comment

I try to always log my DNF's no matter what the reason for not finding a cache. If I start to hunt - which to me includes the driving to the cache segment (finding the parking spot is sometimes the hardest hunt of all) - and don't sign the log book, that is a DNF: I didn't find the cache! I've DNF'd a cache because: someone hit me on the way to the cache (got a newer car out of that one); the park the cache is in is listed as private, so I didn't enter; I didn't like the looks of the hunt; too many people around; ran out of time; etc. etc. etc.. I always write up my story so the owner can judge whether there might be a problem or not. And I've logged multiple DNF's for the same cache (one finally was archived, I still don't know where that little bugger was!).

Link to comment

We just wanted to see what everyone thought about what constitutes a "DNF?" We realize this is a broad topic, but we wanted as many opinions as we could get! For instance, if you give up on a single search but plan to return, should you post a DNF? Thank you to everyone who responds!

 

Simple. If I set out to find a cache and I don't it's a DNF.

Link to comment

Here's another example of why you should log DNFs, especially as a newbie. Look at September 2 on this cache:

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...=y&decrypt=

 

A newbie (slightly fewer finds than me, which I think is the definition) logged a DNF. Because I live a couple of blocks from the cache and have it on my watchlist, I dropped by and checked on it, finding it in good condition. I corresponded with the newbie, who came back and found the cache and enjoyed it and got contact with another cacher out of it too, and I enjoyed the correspondence too.

 

Edward

Link to comment

When I started geocaching, I promised myself to log all my DNF's (I was reading the forums well before my first search/find). But after that I realized that sometimes a DNF does more bad than good, because of the local situation.

I live pretty much in a 'cache free' area, the closest cache is 104 km from my residence. Some of them are in remote areas (beautiful, worth to visit areas), getting 0-3 visits per year, and a DNF will discourage the future seeker (it surely discouraged me doing a 36-hour round-trip to one of them). Now I have the following 'guide to log:

- if I don't reach ground zero, I don't log.

- even if I reach ground zero, but don't search because of any reason, I don't log

- if I search for an insufficient time, I write a note;

- if I search thoroughly, I log a DNF; for a newbie like me, thoroughly searching means 15 minutes for a difficulty 1 cache, 30min for diff2, 1 hour for diff3, 2 hours for diff4, more for diff5.

I also realized that, if I arrive to ground zero with a group of non-geocachers (from my family, they know what I'm there for), usually I won't find the cache.

Link to comment
We emailed the owners for assurance that the cache was still in place, but not for hints. We planned to log a DNF if the owner told us that the cache was in place, however we received no response.

 

If that owner had been me, I would be much less likely to respond to your email precisely because you hadn't logged anything to the cache page. And even if you had logged a DNF, I'm not going to assure you it's in place without going to check it, which may or may not be convenient for me.

 

I'll check on a cache that has received a couple of DNFs. My experience is that usually they're somewhere in the rough vicinity of the coords. Though often shifted from them and sometimes shifted such that the hint no longer works.

 

If I hunt for a cache, any amount of time, and don't find it, I log a DNF. I've gotten rather brief with these, only mentioning a "might be missing" theory if something is extremely amiss. I didn't find it, so I don't know.

Link to comment

Yesterday I went to check on a cache that had received a string of four DNF's in a row, after a string of finds. Low and behold, it was still there, but the last cacher had pushed it way deep into the hiding place in an already sneaky location.

 

I was grateful for the all the candid DNF's because it alerted me to a situation that needed to be addressed. In this case, the hiding spot had been modified to the point that I could not move the cache closer to the point of entry (as originally hidden), so I left it and increased the difficulty by a half star.

Link to comment

We just wanted to see what everyone thought about what constitutes a "DNF?" We realize this is a broad topic, but we wanted as many opinions as we could get! For instance, if you give up on a single search but plan to return, should you post a DNF? Thank you to everyone who responds!

 

Simple. If I set out to find a cache and I don't it's a DNF.

What he said!

 

If you head for a cache with intentions of finding it and you don't find it, doesn't matter why you didn't find it, then it is a DNF. A DNF may help the owner or future finders, adds to the history of the cache, and is nothing to be ashamed of. :laughing:

Link to comment

Back when I used to log everything, my criterion for a DNF was that I actually got to the GZ and searched in a reasonably thorough manner and did not find.

 

If i aborted the search before getting to GZ or if, once there, I aborted before serious looking, i usually would not log DNF.

 

Now I only log them when there is an interesting occurrence whilst on the hunt or when I am fairly certain the cache is gone. But that's just me and i am weird.

 

When, how, and why to log are prerogative of the (non) finder.

Link to comment

When I started geocaching, I promised myself to log all my DNF's (I was reading the forums well before my first search/find). But after that I realized that sometimes a DNF does more bad than good, because of the local situation.

I live pretty much in a 'cache free' area, the closest cache is 104 km from my residence. Some of them are in remote areas (beautiful, worth to visit areas), getting 0-3 visits per year, and a DNF will discourage the future seeker (it surely discouraged me doing a 36-hour round-trip to one of them). Now I have the following 'guide to log:

- if I don't reach ground zero, I don't log.

- even if I reach ground zero, but don't search because of any reason, I don't log

- if I search for an insufficient time, I write a note;

- if I search thoroughly, I log a DNF; for a newbie like me, thoroughly searching means 15 minutes for a difficulty 1 cache, 30min for diff2, 1 hour for diff3, 2 hours for diff4, more for diff5.

I also realized that, if I arrive to ground zero with a group of non-geocachers (from my family, they know what I'm there for), usually I won't find the cache.

I've always wondered about this thinking (bold line above). Just the presence of a DNF is a problem? Without reading why the DNF how can you say it's a problem? The DNF I logged when my car was hit on the way to the cache had nothing to do with a problem with the cache - the problem was me getting to the cache.

Link to comment

Regarding the comment above: in the case of urban caches, caches in high muggle areas, etc, I'm OK to log a DNF; but when the cache is in a remote area, where the owner could not check for it easily, I will log a DNF only after a thorough search.

The cache I was talking about (the 36 hour round-trip) was placed 2.5 years ago. This spring somebody found it, not FTF, but first to log online; few months later, a second seeker DNF'ed it. Because of the DNF, I cancelled my plans to seek this cache (the location is only accessible by boat, there are 3 cruises per week). The cache was later found by somebody else, I will probably seek it next year.

This is why I log a DNF on remote caches only if I'm pretty sure the cache is missing. The owner might wait for 3 DNF's to check the cache, or is not available to check it, or the cache in question is an old 'vacation cache', and I'm not too eager to invest time and money to seek a cache that could be missing. True, the location is worth the visit, but I prefer a beautiful location with a cache...

Link to comment
For instance, if you give up on a single search but plan to return, should you post a DNF?

As a lot of folks have posted above, if we look for it and didn't find it, then it's a DNF.

 

Further, if we ever have to abort the hunt for reasons that pertain to the hunt then it's a DNF. We do this regardless of where in the hunt the abort happens. If we brain fart stage one of a multi, it's still a DNF just like the final we couldn't find/accomplish/finish that stage.

 

Now, we, personally, post a note if we abort for reasons other than something that deals with the hunt. For instance, if we are called away for an emergency we'll likely only write a note if we post anything at all.

 

The reason we distinguish between the two is because some offline database software indicates a cache's readiness roughly via log indicators. A lot of folks pay attention to these. We don't, but a lot of folks do. I don't want to discourage anyone from hunting a cache because they saw a DNF log from us which was not caused by anything at all concerning the hunt.

 

Things that a DNF could indicate that some folks might not think about:

  • Ran out of gas, time, patience, etc.
     
    This would alert future seekers that they may need to allot extra resources than what may be indicated in the cache description.
     
  • Didn't have the proper gear (even though it was indicated in the description.)
     
    Folks should definitely bring the proper gear.
     
     
  • The stages or final may be part of that difficulty rating and not just the puzzle that is obscuring the coordinates.
     
    We have a puzzle like this. The final has stumped quite a few folks. Most need additional hints.

Obviously not an inclusive list, but should show how a DNF is not a disgrace to the owner--some even collect them as validation of the difficulty of their caches. On the contrary, they are useful tools to other seekers if used properly.

Link to comment
This is why I log a DNF on remote caches only if I'm pretty sure the cache is missing.

The type of log is only a indication of the nature of the text inside. The situations you describe can certainly happen with a note and the outcome would be the same.

 

The only real difference between a DNF or a note log-type is the color of the icons and how that affects someone decision to look at the text.

 

In the scenario you describe, if the second person to log had written the same passage but used the note log-type, would you have gone after the cache? How would you have felt if you wasted all that time and money only discover the cache was, in fact, missing?

 

Remember, you can't be certain the cache is missing if you searched and didn't find it. How do you quantify "thorough?" Even previous finders or owners sometimes can't find the cache.

Link to comment
I live pretty much in a 'cache free' area, the closest cache is 104 km from my residence. Some of them are in remote areas (beautiful, worth to visit areas), getting 0-3 visits per year, and a DNF will discourage the future seeker (it surely discouraged me doing a 36-hour round-trip to one of them). Now I have the following 'guide to log:

- if I don't reach ground zero, I don't log.

- even if I reach ground zero, but don't search because of any reason, I don't log

- if I search for an insufficient time, I write a note;

- if I search thoroughly, I log a DNF; for a newbie like me, thoroughly searching means 15 minutes for a difficulty 1 cache, 30min for diff2, 1 hour for diff3, 2 hours for diff4, more for diff5.

I also realized that, if I arrive to ground zero with a group of non-geocachers (from my family, they know what I'm there for), usually I won't find the cache.

 

As a cache owner I want to know if people are looking for my cache. If people don't log a found it or DNF how am I supposed to know?

 

If you don't reach ground zero it could mean something to the cache owner or other geocachers. Perhaps there were obstacles that you encountered that might be useful to know about. Perhaps the owner rated the terrain too low and might want to adjust it. Other geocachers would be interested in knowing if you were turned around by that swamp that you couldn't get around, or if you called it off because it was getting dark and the hike was longer than expected, or maybe you chose the wrong approach, or there were no parking signs at the most logical place to park on the map.

 

If you reach ground zero and don't search, the reason why could also be crucial information for others. If there are non geocachers hanging out there, that could be important to know. The owner might not have know known that the spot is popular (perhaps he hid it on a weekend and it's popular mid week, or vice versa) and without your DNF log he won't know until someone else logs a DNF (hopefully not everyone adheres to your personal rules).

 

DNF logs often contain important information for owners and your fellow geocachers whether you reached the spot and searched for x minutes and even if you dind't make it to GZ.

Link to comment

DIStorm says I will log a DNF only after a thorough search. But even this is putting too fine a grain on it. What if I searched thoroughly, but I was tired and the light was failing? What if I searched thoroughly but hadn't brought the description with me?

 

There's absolutely no way that you can "be reasonably sure the cache is missing" unless you've found it before or communicated with someone who has. I've read way too many DNF logs from experienced cachers that say "I'm pretty sure it's missing" followed the next day by a find.

 

DNF logs per se don't discourage me. They just indicate to me that I should read the log entry. Heck, my first FTF had been DNF-ed half a dozen times by experienced cachers. That just whetted my appetite, but the text of the logs gave me ideas on where to look. (There was an error in the listing.)

 

I have used "post a note". For example, there was a field I didn't want to walk across under the circumstances, and so didn't get within 100 yards of the cache. I posted a "didn't look for it" note. If I were doing it again, I might use a DNF. At that point it's a judgement call.

 

I continue to agree with the others here: DNF logs provide useful information, and the only sufficiently simple criterion is "sought it and didn't find it".

 

Edward

Link to comment

Further, if we ever have to abort the hunt for reasons that pertain to the hunt then it's a DNF.

 

Now, we, personally, post a note if we abort for reasons other than something that deals with the hunt. For instance, if we are called away for an emergency we'll likely only write a note if we post anything at all.

 

I realized last night that this is the implicit rule of thumb that we use too. I wouldn't post a DNF if I got in a car accident on the way to the parking area (unless there is something to suggest that getting to the parking area is particularly more dangerous than getting anywhere else in the area). I didn't post a DNF when we got to the hiking trails and realized our original GPSr wouldn't get any signal through tree cover.

 

I would only even post a note in a case that had to do with us only and not the cache if it was a really good story. Otherwise I wouldn't want to push down other more useful/relevant logs with our note. I might also do it on a very infrequently sought cache, just to let the owner know that we were interested, and will be back.

Link to comment

We usually only log DNFs if we have actually searched for the cache and were not able to find it, but we have logged a DNF when we couldn't get to a cache before. We did this to let the owner know about a potential issue as we were stopped at the beginning of the road by Border Patrol and told we couldn't access the road. We thought they should know so they could talk to Border Patrol about caching and such so others wouldn't experience the same problem. I'm sure others have experienced similar situations in which a DNF notification would be appropriate, but otherwise IMHO a DNF should only be used if you tried and couldn't find the cache.

Link to comment

I have found a couple of caches locally where the most recent log was my own DNF, as much as a year previously! I have logged DNF's on caches that were already assumed missing by the owner, because I went and looked anyway. I like to look at my own DNF list from time to time to see what eventually happened to those caches. As others have said, there are good reasons for logging your dnf's, but it's up to you. What I hope you DON'T do is log a "find" because you were at the right spot but the cache was missing. Besides being questionable ethically, that can really be misleading for someone who uses dnf or at least notes to warn them of a possibly missing cache. I've seen many examples of caches with a long list of "finds" after the cache has been acknowledged as missing. Here's my favorite example of tortured logic used to justify a smilie:

"Couldn't log this one as a DNF, since it wasn't there to be found." Yes, they logged it as found... :laughing:

Link to comment

There's no shame in a DNF. If you didn't find at least dnf one cache you obviously aren't trying hard enough.

 

Yeah, what the freaky blue duck with horns said.

 

I do not even consider myself human if my FTFs outnumber my DNFs. This ratio keeps a bit of humility and balance to my caching spirit.

 

A DNF for me is if I set out earnestly to find a cache and end up not signing a cache log.

 

If along a trail, I find something much more interesting to do (such as scout out number and size of trout in a stream, rock hound, et cetera), then I write a note, since I was along the way to find the cache, but found something more interesting, and ended up not really searching. If I get to GZ and look around for any amount of time, and come up empty-handed (defined as not signing a log), then that's a DNF.

Link to comment

Besides all the above reasons for logging a DNF there is one that is high on our list of why you should log them.

 

If the cache is a devious hide as in this one, then the owner gets extra pleasure from reading all the logs, both found it and especially the DNF.

 

Then there is the cache that the owner thinks is rather easy to do, but turns out to be harder than anticipated as in this cache. We did not think it would be very difficult, but it turns out that we needed to adjust the difficulty rating to compensate for how much trouble most people were having.

 

John

Link to comment
We emailed the owners for assurance that the cache was still in place, but not for hints. We planned to log a DNF if the owner told us that the cache was in place, however we received no response.

 

If that owner had been me, I would be much less likely to respond to your email precisely because you hadn't logged anything to the cache page. And even if you had logged a DNF, I'm not going to assure you it's in place without going to check it, which may or may not be convenient for me.

 

I'll check on a cache that has received a couple of DNFs. My experience is that usually they're somewhere in the rough vicinity of the coords. Though often shifted from them and sometimes shifted such that the hint no longer works.

 

If I hunt for a cache, any amount of time, and don't find it, I log a DNF. I've gotten rather brief with these, only mentioning a "might be missing" theory if something is extremely amiss. I didn't find it, so I don't know.

Similar with me. If I've searched a decent amount of time, I'll log a DNF. And if I plan to e-mail the owner for a hint, I'll log a DNF. When I e-mail the owner and don't get a response back, that's just rude in my book, and I probably write it off.

 

As an owner, if someone posts a DNF on one of my caches, I'll wait until three accumulate before checking on the cache. If they want a hint, they need to send an e-mail and log a DNF.

Edited by VirginiaGator
Link to comment
As an owner, if someone posts a DNF on one of my caches, I'll wait until three accumulate before checking on the cache. If they want a hint, they need to send an e-mail and log a DNF.

 

It depends on the cache and the searcher. If my cache is an easy one and the cache hunter is experienced, I may check it after one DNF. If it's a novice cacher I won't give their log as much weight. Usually though I'll wait for two DNFs and I'm definitely out there after three, unless it's supposed to be real hard.

Link to comment

 

Similar with me. If I've searched a decent amount of time, I'll log a DNF. And if I plan to e-mail the owner for a hint, I'll log a DNF. When I e-mail the owner and don't get a response back, that's just rude in my book, and I probably write it off.

 

 

Before you write them off, be sure to check to see if the member is even active anymore. If not, it might be reason to possibly archive the cache or adopt it out. IMHO every cache should have to have an active owner (whether original or an adopted one), but that's another issue.

Edited by elmuyloco5
Link to comment

When I started geocaching, I promised myself to log all my DNF's (I was reading the forums well before my first search/find). But after that I realized that sometimes a DNF does more bad than good, because of the local situation.

I live pretty much in a 'cache free' area, the closest cache is 104 km from my residence. Some of them are in remote areas (beautiful, worth to visit areas), getting 0-3 visits per year, and a DNF will discourage the future seeker (it surely discouraged me doing a 36-hour round-trip to one of them). Now I have the following 'guide to log:

- if I don't reach ground zero, I don't log.

- even if I reach ground zero, but don't search because of any reason, I don't log

- if I search for an insufficient time, I write a note;

- if I search thoroughly, I log a DNF; for a newbie like me, thoroughly searching means 15 minutes for a difficulty 1 cache, 30min for diff2, 1 hour for diff3, 2 hours for diff4, more for diff5.

I also realized that, if I arrive to ground zero with a group of non-geocachers (from my family, they know what I'm there for), usually I won't find the cache.

I've always wondered about this thinking (bold line above). Just the presence of a DNF is a problem? Without reading why the DNF how can you say it's a problem? The DNF I logged when my car was hit on the way to the cache had nothing to do with a problem with the cache - the problem was me getting to the cache.

One reason a DNF can discourage seekers who do not even read the log is that it displays as an icon on GSAK. Actually you get the last 4 icons. If they are 3 out of 4 dnf, it would be a fair conclusion that there is a problem- without reading the logs.

Link to comment

I always leave DNF if I did not find it. It shows other people that it might not be there... also if nobody ever leave DNF... what if 5 people before me couldn't find it but did not log a DNF... then I'm wasting my time.

1. If you enjoy the hunt you are never "wasting your time."

2. The fact that 5 (or more) people could not find it does not in any way prove that it is not there.

3. Even if a cache is verified "missing" by someone who has previously found it, it could still be there- just moved a little or hidden differently.

4. Sometimes caches mysteriously disappear and magically reincarnate. I have encountered cases 3 and 4 several times- once on my own cache.

 

It is really a bummer when you can't find your own cache and then a week later people start posting finds on it- especially when they all say, "easy find." -_-

Link to comment

When I started geocaching, I promised myself to log all my DNF's (I was reading the forums well before my first search/find). But after that I realized that sometimes a DNF does more bad than good, because of the local situation.

I live pretty much in a 'cache free' area, the closest cache is 104 km from my residence. Some of them are in remote areas (beautiful, worth to visit areas), getting 0-3 visits per year, and a DNF will discourage the future seeker (it surely discouraged me doing a 36-hour round-trip to one of them). Now I have the following 'guide to log:

- if I don't reach ground zero, I don't log.

- even if I reach ground zero, but don't search because of any reason, I don't log

- if I search for an insufficient time, I write a note;

- if I search thoroughly, I log a DNF; for a newbie like me, thoroughly searching means 15 minutes for a difficulty 1 cache, 30min for diff2, 1 hour for diff3, 2 hours for diff4, more for diff5.

I also realized that, if I arrive to ground zero with a group of non-geocachers (from my family, they know what I'm there for), usually I won't find the cache.

I've always wondered about this thinking (bold line above). Just the presence of a DNF is a problem? Without reading why the DNF how can you say it's a problem? The DNF I logged when my car was hit on the way to the cache had nothing to do with a problem with the cache - the problem was me getting to the cache.

One reason a DNF can discourage seekers who do not even read the log is that it displays as an icon on GSAK. Actually you get the last 4 icons. If they are 3 out of 4 dnf, it would be a fair conclusion that there is a problem- without reading the logs.

That's the thinking I'm talking about. By not reading the logs and just assuming there is a problem is what I don't understand. There could be a series of DNF's all from the same hunt - say a team/family couldn't find it due to muggles, and each so logged it - without anything being wrong with the cache. And GSAK doesn't show 'notes' so there very well could be a note from a previous finder saying they checked it and it's OK.

Link to comment

My reply as a finder: I log DNF's whenever I arrive at GZ, search, and can't find the cache. If I'm driving and I can't figure out how to get to the cache site and I skip it, that is not a DNF. That would be a note (if I wanted to post it)

 

My reply as an owner: Log something! If you visit my cache site, then log a find, a dnf, a note, whatever, just let me know whats going on. I love all thelogs I get. I think cache owners in my area (including one who has become a good friend) originally noticed me from my DNF logs and not my finds. I'm event he type where if there was a DNF posted on one of mine, I would go check it asap just to make sure it is there. One of mine is so well cammo'd that people pick it up and discard it without finding it. I check it once a week and every time I check it, it has been moved from it's original spot. So people are visiting it, not finding it, but I never know about it. One time I found my cache lying in the street. Had that person logged a DNF I could have replaced it in its spot within a couple hours. Since there was no DNF, my cache could have been laying in the road for days. That worries me. So when in doubt, log a dnf, write a note, whatever. Heck if you were on your way to mine and got in a fender bender, then write me a note about it. That's a story that obviously included my cache though no find was attempted.

Link to comment
If I'm driving and I can't figure out how to get to the cache site and I skip it, that is not a DNF.

What if you found the parking area and your started the hike. 300 yards from the cache the trail is washed out and there is no way available to get to the cache?

 

Post a Note describing the situation.

Link to comment

I log a DNF if I arrived in the area and was able to make some kind of effort to look for it.

 

I don't log a DNF if: 1) for some reason I can't make it to the area where its hidden to even start to look 2) I arrive and find the area too muggle-saturated or 3) there is someone in the area who makes me uncomfortable so I feel I need to leave.

 

There is one cache that took me about 7 months to locate the area it was hidden in. The GPSr kept routing me to a subdivision or a golf course. Although I made numerous attempts, I never got close! So I did not log any DNFs. I did write the cache owner for a clue to a route and never got a response. :unsure:

 

I finally figured out it was in a little-known recreation area way behind a small community college (GPSr didn't have the college roads on its map). Once I finally found the rec area, I did find the cache! And since it turned out that its a broad area of woods, I now have my first cache placed there and am working on a second. My plan is to make this area a place where a cacher can spend a few hours hunting for several caches (fuel economy!).

 

Although my cache log reflects all smileys...I know there were at least 2 DNFs.

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 1
×
×
  • Create New...