"Did Not Finds" ?

[+egami]

DNF's FTW IMO.

 

At any rate...

 

I agree, log DNF's. I am an extremely casual cacher as my numbers will show and have luckily had very few DNF's, but I always log them...

 

What's irritating to me recently is we went to a cache that was in shambles. The container, gone, the log book, gone...yet two people that had visited the cache prior to us logged finds. So, off we go to find the cache....upon arrival, no cache, anywhere...

 

The two people prior to those finds logged for maintenance....hm.

 

Here is the cache: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...fa-122fd344e7de

 

At any rate, I finally contacted the cache owner and they acknowledged it needed replaced and didn't disable it, yet here it sits and because someone goes to the site and finds some remnants of swag plastered to a tree where the cache was they log a find...causing confusion to the cache owner...

Edited November 13, 2007 by egami

[Phatfish16]

Personally, I log everything. First, it helps the cache owner know what's going on in the hunt for his/her cache. Second, it notify's the next cacher regarding details of previous hunts. Third, it lets me track my own hunts and may give me ideas down the road. For example, if I log a DNF today...3 months from now I don't necessarily want to make the same mistakes that I did the first time around. Especially if I don't necessarily remember all of the initial details of the hunt. I try to make my logs as detailed as possible. For my own sake, and hopefully for the CO's enjoyment. It also shows the CO that I appreciate their efforts in hiding the cache for me and other cachers to find.

[Phatfish16]

DNF's FTW IMO.

 

At any rate...

 

I agree, log DNF's. I am an extremely casual cacher as my numbers will show and have luckily had very few DNF's, but I always log them...

 

What's irritating to me recently is we went to a cache that was in shambles. The container, gone, the log book, gone...yet two people that had visited the cache prior to us logged finds. So, off we go to find the cache....upon arrival, no cache, anywhere...

 

The two people prior to those finds logged for maintenance....hm.

 

Here is the cache: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...fa-122fd344e7de

 

At any rate, I finally contacted the cache owner and they acknowledged it needed replaced and didn't disable it, yet here it sits and because someone goes to the site and finds some remnants of swag plastered to a tree where the cache was they log a find...causing confusion to the cache owner...

 

I've also had a similar circumstance. A newbie logged a find on a cache that was DEFINITELY missing. I didn't know that they logged it as missing in their write-up bc I saw their smiley and went after the cache in a dash without reading. Searched the area for a while and gave up. I didn't log a DNF on that cache, but a maintenance log. I did that because when I returned to log my DNF, I finally read the previous cachers log and noticed that they said they DIDN't Find the cache, but knew they were in the correct spot. They logged a smiley...Go figure.

 

But if they logged the DNF, I wouldn't have wasted my time searching for a missing cache.

[+egami]

I've also had a similar circumstance. A newbie logged a find on a cache that was DEFINITELY missing. I didn't know that they logged it as missing in their write-up bc I saw their smiley and went after the cache in a dash without reading. Searched the area for a while and gave up. I didn't log a DNF on that cache, but a maintenance log. I did that because when I returned to log my DNF, I finally read the previous cachers log and noticed that they said they DIDN't Find the cache, but knew they were in the correct spot. They logged a smiley...Go figure.

 

But if they logged the DNF, I wouldn't have wasted my time searching for a missing cache.

 

Yeah, to me that's worse than flat out not logging DNF's....when you deliberately log misleadingly that is when it gets frustrating, especially to an owner and subsequent cachers.

[+bflentje]

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.

 

I quite frequently seek out caches with an inordinate amount of DNFs just to see if I am up to the challange. I've been able to find over a couple dozen caches where I've been "FTF in over a year".

[+Confucius' Cat]

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.

 

I quite frequently seek out caches with an inordinate amount of DNFs just to see if I am up to the challange. I've been able to find over a couple dozen caches where I've been "FTF in over a year".

I have a whole "sock puppet" devoted to just such hunts. I have found a few that were "missing." I basically lost interest in that aspect of the sport in a few months though.

[+simpjkee]

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?

 

thats a note. I got to the parking area. I got out, but I couldn't search because of the conditions

[CoyoteRed]

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?

thats a note. I got to the parking area. I got out, but I couldn't search because of the conditions

Now, see, to me that's a DNF because something of the hunt prevented me from continuing or completing the hunt. That's valuable information that would alert my fellow seekers when they might skip over a note.

 

Remember, folks might use the log-type icons of GSAK and other programs or scan the cache page for purple faces while not reading the logs themselves. Then, when something pops up that might affect the hunt they'll read the appropriate log.

 

Me, I'd rather not hide adverse trail conditions or other pertinent conditions in a log-type that might not be read in a timely manner to be useful.

[+egami]

I wouldn't log a DNF unless I could get to ground zero to search.

[+briansnat]

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?

thats a note. I got to the parking area. I got out, but I couldn't search because of the conditions

Now, see, to me that's a DNF because something of the hunt prevented me from continuing or completing the hunt. That's valuable information that would alert my fellow seekers when they might skip over a note.

 

Remember, folks might use the log-type icons of GSAK and other programs or scan the cache page for purple faces while not reading the logs themselves. Then, when something pops up that might affect the hunt they'll read the appropriate log.

 

Me, I'd rather not hide adverse trail conditions or other pertinent conditions in a log-type that might not be read in a timely manner to be useful.

 

I agree. That is a DNF in my book. I started out intending to find the cache and didn't.

[+Sagefox]

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?

thats a note. I got to the parking area. I got out, but I couldn't search because of the conditions

Now, see, to me that's a DNF because something of the hunt prevented me from continuing or completing the hunt. That's valuable information that would alert my fellow seekers when they might skip over a note.

 

Remember, folks might use the log-type icons of GSAK and other programs or scan the cache page for purple faces while not reading the logs themselves. Then, when something pops up that might affect the hunt they'll read the appropriate log.

 

Me, I'd rather not hide adverse trail conditions or other pertinent conditions in a log-type that might not be read in a timely manner to be useful.

 

People should read the notes.

[+egami]

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?

thats a note. I got to the parking area. I got out, but I couldn't search because of the conditions

Now, see, to me that's a DNF because something of the hunt prevented me from continuing or completing the hunt. That's valuable information that would alert my fellow seekers when they might skip over a note.

 

Remember, folks might use the log-type icons of GSAK and other programs or scan the cache page for purple faces while not reading the logs themselves. Then, when something pops up that might affect the hunt they'll read the appropriate log.

 

Me, I'd rather not hide adverse trail conditions or other pertinent conditions in a log-type that might not be read in a timely manner to be useful.

 

I agree. That is a DNF in my book. I started out intending to find the cache and didn't.

 

I don't know that that's a good criteria across the board. We set out to look for caches and mid-way got derailed because we forgot the diaper bag, ran home to make the change and decided not to go back out.

[+Renegade Knight]

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!

 

My rules are this:

If I get in the car to look for the cache and blow up my motor in the parking lot, that had nothing to do wtih the cache, it may be an amusing note but it's not a DNF.

 

If I look for the cache but abandon the search because of something unrelated to the cache. It's dark, I'm hungry, the kids called, a friend wants to meet for a beer, a wild boar tried to gore me. That's a note to let them know I looked but not a DNF. They didn't yet outwit me with the hide since I have a few more ideas up my sleeve but no time.

 

If I give the cache my best shot and I can't find it. That's a DNF.

 

If I look for the cache and realize that I'm not having fun and I use the Stop Drop and Roll method (Stop, Drop what I'm doing, and Roll on out of there) I'll log a DNF. The odds are I won't be back. I should probably post a note, but I think it's fair to say that I gave up looking.

Edited November 14, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[+Renegade Knight]

...I quite frequently seek out caches with an inordinate amount of DNFs just to see if I am up to the challange. I've been able to find over a couple dozen caches where I've been "FTF in over a year".

I enjoy that challenge as well. I have found that reading the logs helps a lot to determine if the cache is MIA or if the cache is just hard to find.

[+egami]

My rules are this:

If I get in the car to look for the cache and blow up my motor in the parking lot, that had nothing to do wtih the cache, it may be an amusing note but it's not a DNF.

 

If I look for the cache but abandon the search because of something unrelated to the cache. It's dark, I'm hungry, the kids called, a friend wants to meet for a beer, a wild boar tried to gore me. That's a note to let them know I looked but not a DNF. They didn't yet outwit me with the hide since I have a few more ideas up my sleeve but no time.

 

If I give the cache my best shot and I can't find it. That's a DNF.

 

If I look for the cache and realize that I'm not having fun and I use the Stop Drop and Roll method (Stop, Drop what I'm doing, and Roll on out of there) I'll log a DNF. The odds are I won't be back. I should probably post a note, but I think it's fair to say that I gave up looking.

 

That's pretty much my criteria.

Edited November 14, 2007 by egami

[+TotemLake]

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.

Regardless of the answer of there or not there, you searched and you Did Not Find.

 

E-mailing me to see if the cache is still there will make me think you're questioning my ability to maintain it. That would annoy me and I will ignore your e-mail. Your DNF log of your adventure will tell me more about what you did to look for the cache than your inquiry of the cache being there. I am more likely to respond to your DNF log than to your e-mail.

[CoyoteRed]

People should read the notes.

Then you're pretty much making the log-types meaningless for other cachers. If there is no distinction between the types because you're going to have to read them anyway...

[CoyoteRed]

I wouldn't log a DNF unless I could get to ground zero to search.

What if you couldn't find a stage to a multi?

[+Sagefox]

My rules are this:

If I get in the car to look for the cache and blow up my motor in the parking lot, that had nothing to do wtih the cache, it may be an amusing note but it's not a DNF.

 

If I look for the cache but abandon the search because of something unrelated to the cache. It's dark, I'm hungry, the kids called, a friend wants to meet for a beer, a wild boar tried to gore me. That's a note to let them know I looked but not a DNF. They didn't yet outwit me with the hide since I have a few more ideas up my sleeve but no time.

 

If I give the cache my best shot and I can't find it. That's a DNF.

 

If I look for the cache and realize that I'm not having fun and I use the Stop Drop and Roll method (Stop, Drop what I'm doing, and Roll on out of there) I'll log a DNF. The odds are I won't be back. I should probably post a note, but I think it's fair to say that I gave up looking.

 

That's pretty much my criteria.

 

Same for me.

[+Sagefox]

People should read the notes.

Then you're pretty much making the log-types meaningless for other cachers. If there is no distinction between the types because you're going to have to read them anyway...

 

Are you saying that cachers ignore notes and only look for DNF's to determine if there are problems?

[+Sagefox]

I wouldn't log a DNF unless I could get to ground zero to search.

What if you couldn't find a stage to a multi?

 

I would think most people would agree that this is a DNF. An effort was made to find the cache.

[+Harry Dolphin]

My rules are this:

If I get in the car to look for the cache and blow up my motor in the parking lot, that had nothing to do wtih the cache, it may be an amusing note but it's not a DNF.

 

If I look for the cache but abandon the search because of something unrelated to the cache. It's dark, I'm hungry, the kids called, a friend wants to meet for a beer, a wild boar tried to gore me. That's a note to let them know I looked but not a DNF. They didn't yet outwit me with the hide since I have a few more ideas up my sleeve but no time.

 

If I give the cache my best shot and I can't find it. That's a DNF.

 

If I look for the cache and realize that I'm not having fun and I use the Stop Drop and Roll method (Stop, Drop what I'm doing, and Roll on out of there) I'll log a DNF. The odds are I won't be back. I should probably post a note, but I think it's fair to say that I gave up looking.

 

In general, I'll agree with this, for most caches. But I have a few other criteria. If it's a nasty hide (as opposed to an evil hide) I probably will not inflate the cache owner's ego. And, yes, there are cache hides like that out there. Hollow log in a pile of logs? That's just nasty.

Had two caches that we didn't find last weekend. One was in a beautiful park. Saw two herons! The cache was probably muggled a few months ago, but I do not read logs until after I search. DNF. Cache owner should have checked on it a few months ago. Oh,well. The other was a nano on a long fence at a marina. I know it's still there, even though I didn't find it. The cache owner knows that it's still there. I'm not about to inflate his ego. Not even a note on that one.

[CoyoteRed]

Are you saying that cachers ignore notes and only look for DNF's to determine if there are problems?

That's exactly what I'm saying. As I mentioned before about the icons in GSAK or scanning the page for purple faces, notes don't always trigger the notion a previous cacher was unable to complete the hunt for reasons that might affect you as well. You can scan the icons and not read the logs themselves to get an idea of the viability of the cache hunt and not expose yourself to a spoiler.

 

Yes, I know some folks read the whole page including every single log. Not everyone caches that way. It's just something I think folks should be aware of. If you're wanting to tell your fellow cachers about a potential problem it only makes sense to let them know in a way that gets the better exposure.

[+The Leprechauns]

See my signature line -- "I log all my DNF's." One reason I do this is because the DNF logs often make for more interesting stories. My DNF bookmark list will lead a bored reader to many such stories.

 

To those who don't log a DNF if they only looked for a couple of minutes... to be consistent, please stop logging "found its" if you locate the cache very quickly.

 

In the past few years, however, I've developed a new type of visit -- a "DNA," or "Did Not Attempt." If I see conditions which make me not even want to pull over and stop, but instead I just drive to the next cache, I don't bother logging anything. I have to get out of the car before I call it a cache hunt.

[+egami]

I wouldn't log a DNF unless I could get to ground zero to search.

What if you couldn't find a stage to a multi?

 

Then I didn't get to ground zero, did I?

Edited November 16, 2007 by egami

[+Sagefox]

Are you saying that cachers ignore notes and only look for DNF's to determine if there are problems?

That's exactly what I'm saying. As I mentioned before about the icons in GSAK or scanning the page for purple faces, notes don't always trigger the notion a previous cacher was unable to complete the hunt for reasons that might affect you as well. You can scan the icons and not read the logs themselves to get an idea of the viability of the cache hunt and not expose yourself to a spoiler.

 

Then I will reconsider the criteria I use for DNF's. If something prevents me from getting to the cache, as in your trail washout example above, then that shoud be a DNF and it would make a good story. I'm reasonably sure I would have done that anyway.

 

What I don't want to post a DNF for (and why I usually respond to these DNF topics) is when I choose not to look for a cache but there is no reason that someone else should not try it. Good story, or not, this type of DNF would create exactly the kind of problem that you just mentioned. In the past I have referred to this as "punishing" the cache. An unnecessary DNF will be seen by GSAKers and purple face scanners and might cause them to avoid a cache unnecessarily.

 

I agree with Lep that DNF logs can be fun. My average DNF log word count is up there too.

[+Miragee]

I posted a DNF for a Multi cache I looked for and didn't find yesterday. It had not been found since August, but since few people look for Multis, I had no reason to think there would be a problem with the first waypoint.

 

But there was.

 

After posting my DNF (my 278th), I got one "Thank you" email from the cache owner, then got another email letting me know they have Disabled the cache while they fix it.

 

Posting DNFs is a good thing.

[+briansnat]

I posted a DNF for a Multi cache I looked for and didn't find yesterday. It had not been found since August, but since few people look for Multis, I had no reason to think there would be a problem with the first waypoint.

 

But there was.

 

After posting my DNF (my 278th), I got one "Thank you" email from the cache owner, then got another email letting me know they have Disabled the cache while they fix it.

 

Posting DNFs is a good thing.

 

And I think it's a safe bet that at least one person (and probably several) looked for it since August and didn't log his DNF. Had he done so you wouldn't have wasted your time and the owner would have addressed the problem earlier.

[+HyperactiveGirl]

Being new at this... I have tried to go to a few caches in my area, and notice that some of them have not logged anything in a couple months. So I go anyway, and the cache appears to no longer be there. If others had logged their DNF's, and I am sure there were many because caches less than a quarter mile were frequented daily, then I would have known that the cache was probably not there anymore and to try some caches which might still be there instead.

 

Like others have said above, a DNF is not a negative thing. I actually like posting my DNF's because it shows that I was out there having fun and hunting, even if i didn't find anything. I don't think there should be a negative connotation to a DNF. Instead it is a positive thing, it means you are out there playing and having fun and hunting.

 

Logging DNF's would help others like myself not get discouraged when we are just starting out wondering why we cannot find caches but then we realize nothing has been logged on those caches in months and they are probably no longer there but noone took the time to log their DNF.

 

Other than that, this is so much fun!

[+Kabuthunk]

My theory is to take it literally. 'If I looked and didn't find it, it's a DNF'.

 

If however I got near the area, but could not look due to ton of people nearby, etc, etc, then I usually post a note saying I'll try later. I do this because I did not look (my definition of look in this case being to search, not just see the area from a distance). If I have to stop a hundred meters from the cache and turn around for some reason, I don't consider that looking.

[+Too Tall John]

How's this for a suggestion:

 

If you aborted your hunt for a reason that might be a consideration for another geocacher, post a DNF.

 

Couldn't find container = DNF

Too many Muggles = DNF

Trail impassable/GZ inaccessible = DNF

Unexpected time constraints (took longer than planned) = DNF

Felt in danger = DNF

 

Those types of things.

 

If you quit because you got a hangnail, or your shoes were wet from the last hunt & you decided to give up, or you just didn't feel like going on, then it could either be a DNF or a Note.

 

If there's something others should know, they are more likely to read a DNF log, IMHO.

[+Sagefox]

Briansnat

 

And I think it's a safe bet that at least one person (and probably several) looked for it since August and didn't log his DNF. Had he done so you wouldn't have wasted your time and the owner would have addressed the problem earlier.

 

Yes. I think everyone who's posted here will agree with this. Any part of a multi missing should be a DNF.

 

Miragee

 

After posting my DNF (my 278th), I got one "Thank you" email from the cache owner, then got another email letting me know they have Disabled the cache while they fix it.

Posting DNFs is a good thing.

 

Yes. The first stage was missing so a DNF is appropriate. I think everyone who's posted here will agree with this.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that a stage, or final container missing should not be a DNF. And I believe that most people would post a DNF if something other than muggles actually prevented them from getting to ground zero, such as a trail washout, etc.

 

But many of us feel that a DNF when we choose not to look for the container, such as we got lazy, bored, too many muggles when the container is in a high muggle area, it got dark, rainy, we didn't like the trash dump at the trail head, we ran out of time, etc, etc, etc. Many of us think these are not good reasons to log a DNF.

 

CR's point is well taken too. People scan for DNFs when deciding if it's going to be a go or a no-go.

[+Harry Dolphin]

Are you saying that cachers ignore notes and only look for DNF's to determine if there are problems?

That's exactly what I'm saying. As I mentioned before about the icons in GSAK or scanning the page for purple faces, notes don't always trigger the notion a previous cacher was unable to complete the hunt for reasons that might affect you as well. You can scan the icons and not read the logs themselves to get an idea of the viability of the cache hunt and not expose yourself to a spoiler.

 

Yes, I know some folks read the whole page including every single log. Not everyone caches that way. It's just something I think folks should be aware of. If you're wanting to tell your fellow cachers about a potential problem it only makes sense to let them know in a way that gets the better exposure.

 

I read the cache page. I seldom, if ever, read logs before I hunt for a cache. Else, I'd have known that one DNF from today is fifty feet from ground zero. In my naïvete, I assume that cache owners make corrections when half the finders report the coords being off by fifty feet. Be that as it may, I do read the logs after a DNF. Sometimes that helps considerably. Sometimes not. On the other fin, I just deleted three recent DNFs because the cache owner took exception to some of my logs. Oh, well. This is supposed to be fun, isn't it?