What is the purpose of a DNF log?

[+WRASTRO]

When I fired up my email this morning I had my first ever log deletion notice. I didn't even remember the cache so I went and checked it out. The log was a DNF from April for a cache I hunted while visiting the Anaheim area for a few days during Spring break. Nothing out of the ordinary. So I emailed the owner and asked why they deleted the log. My email and responses are posted below.

 

Has anyone ever encountered this philosophy before? It sure doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Email to Anaheim Hider:

 

Hi, I am curious as to why you deleted my DNF log from April on your (Anaheim) cache. There certainly can't be anything offensive about it. I searched and couldn't find it.

 

Log details below:

 

California Wednesday, April 04, 2007

WRASTRO couldn't find (Anaheim Cache)

 

George only had a few minutes at about 6:15 before heading back to the hotel for more Disney fun. With evening traffic it was impossible to give anything a good search. Such is caching life.

 

Response from Anaheim Hider:

 

On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 10:09am Anaheim Hider wrote:

 

Greetings.

 

The DNF feature was put in place to notify Owners (and other cachers) that a

cache is missing, or damaged, so we delete DNF's after we do cache

maintenance. This keeps the cache page uncluttered, and the DNF's in pocket

queries won"t discourage cachers from looking for the cache. It's back in

play, so enjoy the hunt.

 

See ya caching

Anaheim Hider

 

My response:

 

From: wrastro <wrastro@blarg.net>

To: Anaheim Hider

Subject: Re: [GEO] WRASTRO contacting Anaheim Hider from Geocaching.com

Date: Today 10:39am

I respectfully disagree with your view of the purpose of a DNF. The DNF feature is for the cacher to log that they searched for the cache and did not find it. My log that you deleted did not imply in any way that there was a problem with the cache. Clearly others found it after my DNF so you had full knowledge that there was not a problem. My DNF log from April will not appear in a PQ since they only show the last five logs so that has no impact in this case.

 

Owner notification is one part of it, but it is also part of the cache history as well as the cacher's hunting history. A DNF can describe the experience of the hunt and can be an alert for future cachers that there may be times when it is more difficult to search, or that some tool might be helpful.

 

Many of the best and most entertaining logs are the DNF posts describing cacher's experiences in trying to find a cache. They have nothing to do with notifying the owner that there is or may be a problem with the cache itself. It would be a sad thing to lose this history.

 

I have been caching for just over four years and this is the first time anyone has deleted one of my logs for any reason. It is your cache and you have the right to delete logs, but your reasoning is, in my experience, flawed.

 

Just out of curiousity, why haven't you deleted the remaining DNF logs from this cache? A quick check of some of your other caches also shows old DNF logs. Is this a new policy you have just adopted?

[+Bad_CRC]

hider can do pretty much what they want.

 

I log DNFs all the time. I often post pics of the hike and descriptions of the area. several of my most fun caching experiences have been DNFs. I'd be annoyed if someone deleted them for the reasons stated, but they can do it if they like, it's their cache.

 

just chalk it up to differences in how the game is played, and move on. I doubt you'll run across that again, if so, not often.

[+FireRef]

A agree with your assessment of the situation. The cache owner is entitled to do whatever he wants, but this is an unusual attitude. DNF's are just as useful and interesting as finds to read, plus often give the owner and other finders more information about the cache. Oh well. At least you didn't lose a smiley becaue of it!

[+TrailGators]

I can see both sides. I can see the logic in doing it so the paperless cachers don't get a bunch of DNF logs after the cache has been replaced. I can also understand people wanting to keep the history. Which one is more important? That's up to the owner.

[+WRASTRO]

I can see both sides. I can see the logic in doing it so the paperless cachers don't get a bunch of DNF logs after the cache has been replaced. I can also understand people wanting to keep the history. Which one is more important? That's up to the owner.

 

How can a paperless cacher get anything for a DNF from eight months prior with a bunch of found it logs since that time?

[+TrailGators]

I can see both sides. I can see the logic in doing it so the paperless cachers don't get a bunch of DNF logs after the cache has been replaced. I can also understand people wanting to keep the history. Which one is more important? That's up to the owner.

How can a paperless cacher get anything for a DNF from eight months prior with a bunch of found it logs since that time?

They get the last 5 logs. How many founds were there at the time the owner deleted the DNF?

[+WRASTRO]

I can see both sides. I can see the logic in doing it so the paperless cachers don't get a bunch of DNF logs after the cache has been replaced. I can also understand people wanting to keep the history. Which one is more important? That's up to the owner.

How can a paperless cacher get anything for a DNF from eight months prior with a bunch of found it logs since that time?

They get the last 5 logs. How many founds were there at the time the owner deleted the DNF?

 

There have been about 25 found it logs in the 8 months since my DNF. The owner also replaced the log in the cache less than a week after my DNF. So why go back and delete that log now? Plus there are still 16 earlier DNF logs on the cache.

[+Miragee]

When I fired up my email this morning I had my first ever log deletion notice. I didn't even remember the cache so I went and checked it out. The log was a DNF from April for a cache I hunted while visiting the Anaheim area for a few days during Spring break. Nothing out of the ordinary. So I emailed the owner and asked why they deleted the log. My email and responses are posted below.

 

Has anyone ever encountered this philosophy before? It sure doesn't make any sense to me.

It doesn't make any sense to me either. As a cache owner, I would never Delete anyone's DNF log, even if they said they never got out of their car to start the search. That is part of that cacher's history. They were there that day, and that is the story they have to tell for when they were at, or near, my cache.

 

A DNF is a "Did Not Find." It is not a "Cache is Missing" log. I definitely don't understand why a cache owner would delete a DNF . . .

[+TrailGators]

I can see both sides. I can see the logic in doing it so the paperless cachers don't get a bunch of DNF logs after the cache has been replaced. I can also understand people wanting to keep the history. Which one is more important? That's up to the owner.

How can a paperless cacher get anything for a DNF from eight months prior with a bunch of found it logs since that time?

They get the last 5 logs. How many founds were there at the time the owner deleted the DNF?

 

There have been about 25 found it logs in the 8 months since my DNF. The owner also replaced the log in the cache less than a week after my DNF. So why go back and delete that log now? Plus there are still 16 earlier DNF logs on the cache.

In that case, don't know why, but I wouldn't worry about it. There are much bigger things to worry about.

[+WRASTRO]

I can see both sides. I can see the logic in doing it so the paperless cachers don't get a bunch of DNF logs after the cache has been replaced. I can also understand people wanting to keep the history. Which one is more important? That's up to the owner.

How can a paperless cacher get anything for a DNF from eight months prior with a bunch of found it logs since that time?

They get the last 5 logs. How many founds were there at the time the owner deleted the DNF?

 

There have been about 25 found it logs in the 8 months since my DNF. The owner also replaced the log in the cache less than a week after my DNF. So why go back and delete that log now? Plus there are still 16 earlier DNF logs on the cache.

In that case, don't know why, but I wouldn't worry about it. There are much bigger things to worry about.

 

I am not worried about it, just a bit frustrated that it even happened. That is why I started the topic just to make sure I am not out in left field on this. I certainly won't be losing any sleep over a deleted log on a non-descript cache 800 miles from me that I won't ever hunt for again.

[+TrailGators]

I can see both sides. I can see the logic in doing it so the paperless cachers don't get a bunch of DNF logs after the cache has been replaced. I can also understand people wanting to keep the history. Which one is more important? That's up to the owner.

How can a paperless cacher get anything for a DNF from eight months prior with a bunch of found it logs since that time?

They get the last 5 logs. How many founds were there at the time the owner deleted the DNF?

 

There have been about 25 found it logs in the 8 months since my DNF. The owner also replaced the log in the cache less than a week after my DNF. So why go back and delete that log now? Plus there are still 16 earlier DNF logs on the cache.

In that case, don't know why, but I wouldn't worry about it. There are much bigger things to worry about.

 

I am not worried about it, just a bit frustrated that it even happened. That is why I started the topic just to make sure I am not out in left field on this. I certainly won't be losing any sleep over a deleted log on a non-descript cache 800 miles from me that I won't ever hunt for again.

The fact is that the site runs by letting owners decide how their cache pages should be managed. I think you'll find that there are all types of people out there and there's nothing you can do about the ones that frustrate you except to ignore them and the silly things they do. Edited December 30, 2007 by TrailGators

[+WRASTRO]

I can see both sides. I can see the logic in doing it so the paperless cachers don't get a bunch of DNF logs after the cache has been replaced. I can also understand people wanting to keep the history. Which one is more important? That's up to the owner.

How can a paperless cacher get anything for a DNF from eight months prior with a bunch of found it logs since that time?

They get the last 5 logs. How many founds were there at the time the owner deleted the DNF?

 

There have been about 25 found it logs in the 8 months since my DNF. The owner also replaced the log in the cache less than a week after my DNF. So why go back and delete that log now? Plus there are still 16 earlier DNF logs on the cache.

In that case, don't know why, but I wouldn't worry about it. There are much bigger things to worry about.

 

I am not worried about it, just a bit frustrated that it even happened. That is why I started the topic just to make sure I am not out in left field on this. I certainly won't be losing any sleep over a deleted log on a non-descript cache 800 miles from me that I won't ever hunt for again.

The fact is that the site runs by letting owners decide how their cache pages should be managed. I think you'll find that there are all types of people out there and there's nothing you can do about the ones that frustrate you except to ignore them and the silly things they do.

 

With finds in several states and just starting our 5th year of active caching, we have encountered many different ways that people play the game. This one just seems lame by my standards. They can play however they want and it won't bother me in the least beyond the frustration this morning of having a log deleted for no good reason.

[+Illinois Bill]

When I fired up my email this morning I had my first ever log deletion notice. I didn't even remember the cache so I went and checked it out. The log was a DNF from April for a cache I hunted while visiting the Anaheim area for a few days during Spring break. Nothing out of the ordinary. So I emailed the owner and asked why they deleted the log. My email and responses are posted below.

 

Has anyone ever encountered this philosophy before? It sure doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Email to Anaheim Hider:

 

Hi, I am curious as to why you deleted my DNF log from April on your (Anaheim) cache. There certainly can't be anything offensive about it. I searched and couldn't find it.

 

Log details below:

 

California Wednesday, April 04, 2007

WRASTRO couldn't find (Anaheim Cache)

 

George only had a few minutes at about 6:15 before heading back to the hotel for more Disney fun. With evening traffic it was impossible to give anything a good search. Such is caching life.

 

Response from Anaheim Hider:

 

On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 10:09am Anaheim Hider wrote:

 

Greetings.

 

The DNF feature was put in place to notify Owners (and other cachers) that a

cache is missing, or damaged, so we delete DNF's after we do cache

maintenance. This keeps the cache page uncluttered, and the DNF's in pocket

queries won"t discourage cachers from looking for the cache. It's back in

play, so enjoy the hunt.

 

See ya caching

Anaheim Hider

 

My response:

 

From: wrastro <wrastro@blarg.net>

To: Anaheim Hider

Subject: Re: [GEO] WRASTRO contacting Anaheim Hider from Geocaching.com

Date: Today 10:39am

I respectfully disagree with your view of the purpose of a DNF. The DNF feature is for the cacher to log that they searched for the cache and did not find it. My log that you deleted did not imply in any way that there was a problem with the cache. Clearly others found it after my DNF so you had full knowledge that there was not a problem. My DNF log from April will not appear in a PQ since they only show the last five logs so that has no impact in this case.

 

Owner notification is one part of it, but it is also part of the cache history as well as the cacher's hunting history. A DNF can describe the experience of the hunt and can be an alert for future cachers that there may be times when it is more difficult to search, or that some tool might be helpful.

 

Many of the best and most entertaining logs are the DNF posts describing cacher's experiences in trying to find a cache. They have nothing to do with notifying the owner that there is or may be a problem with the cache itself. It would be a sad thing to lose this history.

 

I have been caching for just over four years and this is the first time anyone has deleted one of my logs for any reason. It is your cache and you have the right to delete logs, but your reasoning is, in my experience, flawed.

 

Just out of curiousity, why haven't you deleted the remaining DNF logs from this cache? A quick check of some of your other caches also shows old DNF logs. Is this a new policy you have just adopted?

Yup, Although I am relatively new to the caching experience I received my first deleted DNF log today. I use the DNF's as good ones to look for because they are not found but perhaps not missing. I have several caches like that see: "Thanks Larry 2 GC13E3H" log of my/our find after 3 DNFs and a temp. disable listing, that have been found.. Oh yeah, I found it and it was tough.....

[+hukilaulau]

I've had logs deleted for that reason by one local cacher. Although I disagree with the philosophy, I respect his right to do whatever he wants with the logs. Slightly off topic, but I've also had "found" logs deleted cuz the owner didn't like what I said. I simply re-logged the cache with "found it" and moved on.

[+KJcachers]

pretty sure DNF just means did not find. If it's missing then "maintenance required" should be logged. Also, several DNF's in a row should give the owner a heads up on a possible MIA. I also like to see how many DNF's are on a cache as that can tell you more about the difficulty of the hide that the actual rating.

[+Markwell]

I really wouldn't want my DNF logs deleted for something as trivial as "keeping the cache page uncluttered".

[+WRASTRO]

I really wouldn't want my DNF logs deleted for something as trivial as "keeping the cache page uncluttered".

 

I am so happy that you chimed in! Here is the latest. I highlighted a few areas that I thought were of particular interest:

 

From: Anaheim Hider

To: wrastro <wrastro@blarg.net>

Subject: Re: [GEO] WRASTRO contacting Anaheim Hider

Date: Today 03:40pm

I understand your point, but recent conversations with Veteran Cachers, and

the Geocaching Website Designers have encouraged us to respect the original

intent of the DNF log functions. DNFs do nothing for the caching community

once a cache is repaired or replaced. The majority of cachers do not read

"historical" DNFs. While the logs can be humorous, they are costly to the

site developers. They have incorporated fields in the databases to store the

log counts recently to provide the statistical feedback that geocachers

requested in the forums (note the log summaries with icons at the top of the

log section of each cache page.). Even if a DNF or Needs Maintenance log is

deleted, the statistics will be displayed.

 

After discussions, it was found that DNF logs only take up space, both on the

servers, and in the log section. (BTW: PQs have unlimited logs listed unless

otherwise specified. If you are using GSAK look at your export settings.)

There is even talk about having an automatic archival database added to the

functionality of the site to speed up the processing of current information

for PQs, and the cache pages... This would automatically archive logs to

another area that you would have to specifically enter, and it would not be

found in the standard .gpx files, or on the cache pages.

 

Currently, as a general rule we will keep DNF logs that we think have useful

information or have a certain appeal to future cachers. But you must know &

have experienced the evolution this game has taken, and it is for that cause

that we have incorporated some of the suggestions brought to us. We have not

gotten to all of the logs, because time has not permitted yet. We definitely

plan to delete any unnecessary logs, and modify some of our cache pages with

updated information relating to muggle-factor, and utilize more attributes.

This will allow Geocaching.com to run more efficiently, and also clean up the

pages for the currently seeking cachers.

 

It is a personal decision, and I know other cachers who differ in opinion.

They are welcome to play the game as they will. We are just trying to help

the folks who moderate the game, and hopefully serve the community as a whole.

There are a lot of changes on the way, and we are certain much more debate

will continue. We just look forward to the community growing, and sharing a

game that we love.

 

I hope this is understandable, and please do not feel offended. We love this

game! We believe it has greatly enriched our lives, and wish nothing less for

all it's participants; current & future.

[+Miragee]

Oh, puleeze . . . What a bunch of ****!

[+WRASTRO]

Oh, puleeze . . . What a bunch of ****!

 

I just couldn't resist. My response:

 

It is your cache and you can deal with logs the way you want to. But...

 

I don't want to be rude but your response is bordering on the obsurd. There has been absolutely no indication from Groundspeak that there should be any kind of a limitation on cache logs. The storage space required for a log of any kind is miniscule. If your premise were correct then the powers that be at Groundspeak would simply delete all logs that are older than a given date, and they certainly are not doing that. If they are truly concerned about storage space they would not allow pictures, which take up far more space then simple logs. They would also reduce the character limit for logs of any kind.

 

What about notes? If I post a note on your cache now that is identical to the DNF log that you deleted will you delete that as well? What about simple Found It logs? Should a TNLNSL log be deleted because it adds no value? What about a really long Found It log that describes the cacher's entire day of caching and includes information about the other 50 or 60 or more caches they found that day?

 

If storage space is truly a problem don't you think that the folks from Groundspeak would tell the geocaching community as a whole and not just you?

 

A pocket query returns the last 5 logs and those can add to previous saved versions of the same PQ. I use GSAK and see nothing to support your premise. If someone runs a PQ on the original stash they aren't going to get a gpx file that has all 1,500+ logs. They will get the last five logs.

 

What this really seems like is that you have simply decided you are going to dictate the "type" and "quality" of logs for your caches. Good luck. Have fun playing the game your way. I am glad I don't live in your area.

[+Ambrosia]

DNF's are just as important to me as Found it logs are. They are my experience at that cache on that day. All of my logs are important for me to look back over in the future, a kind of online caching journal. I would be very upset if someone did this to one of my logs.

[+Serial007]

A lot of the time DNF logs help me more than the find logs. I don't want to be tipped off to where a cache is but going to a cache with an idea that someone searched somewhere without result is almost like having someone with you caching. With a single DNF I know that the cache might take a bit of hard looking before I find it and not to give up hope. With a lot of DNFs, especially in a row, I know that the cache might be gone completely.

 

I would hate for anyone to delete a log. Logs show that some effort, however slight, was put into the cache by a finder. I try and search to the level of the difficulty of the cache and if I don't end up finding it I post a log. I paperless cache using my PSP, and I don't run into any problems with anyones logs, long or short. Some owners manage their logs differently though but the rules allow the owners to do so.

Edited December 31, 2007 by Serial007

[+Prime Suspect]

My humble take on this missive.

 

From: Anaheim Hider

To: wrastro <wrastro@blarg.net>

Subject: Re: [GEO] WRASTRO contacting Anaheim Hider

Date: Today 03:40pm

I understand your point, but recent conversations with Veteran Cachers, and

the Geocaching Website Designers have encouraged us to respect the original

intent of the DNF log functions. DNFs do nothing for the caching community

once a cache is repaired or replaced. The majority of cachers do not read

"historical" DNFs. While the logs can be humorous, they are costly to the

site developers. They have incorporated fields in the databases to store the

log counts recently to provide the statistical feedback that geocachers

requested in the forums (note the log summaries with icons at the top of the

log section of each cache page.). Even if a DNF or Needs Maintenance log is

deleted, the statistics will be displayed.

No, I'm pretty sure it will affect the statistics on the page (though the effect may not be seen until the page is regenerated). Furthermore, the ratio of finds to DNFs gives cachers a better indication of the difficulty of a cache than the owner's rating does. If you delete the DNFs, you destroy that information, and make the cache seem easier than it might me.

After discussions, it was found that DNF logs only take up space, both on the

servers, and in the log section. (BTW: PQs have unlimited logs listed unless

otherwise specified. If you are using GSAK look at your export settings.)

There is even talk about having an automatic archival database added to the

functionality of the site to speed up the processing of current information

for PQs, and the cache pages... This would automatically archive logs to

another area that you would have to specifically enter, and it would not be

found in the standard .gpx files, or on the cache pages.

Again, not right, at least as far as the system's servers go. Logs are not "deleted", they are simply tagged to not appear on the page. If you accidentally delete a log, you can contact a reviewer and s/he can restore it. Therefore, the log still exists when a cache owner "deletes" it. So any thought of doing this to save server space is just a misguided fantasy.

 

Currently, as a general rule we will keep DNF logs that we think have useful

information or have a certain appeal to future cachers. But you must know &

have experienced the evolution this game has taken, and it is for that cause

that we have incorporated some of the suggestions brought to us. We have not

gotten to all of the logs, because time has not permitted yet. We definitely

plan to delete any unnecessary logs, and modify some of our cache pages with

updated information relating to muggle-factor, and utilize more attributes.

This will allow Geocaching.com to run more efficiently, and also clean up the

pages for the currently seeking cachers.

The very fact that I may have hunted a cache before is important information TO ME. However you want to make that judgement for me. No thanks.

It is a personal decision, and I know other cachers who differ in opinion.

They are welcome to play the game as they will. We are just trying to help

the folks who moderate the game, and hopefully serve the community as a whole.

There are a lot of changes on the way, and we are certain much more debate

will continue. We just look forward to the community growing, and sharing a

game that we love.

 

I hope this is understandable, and please do not feel offended. We love this

game! We believe it has greatly enriched our lives, and wish nothing less for

all it's participants; current & future.

Gee, I must have miss the memo where GS asked people to delete DNF logs. Oh, that's right. THEY NEVER DID. Like the idea that you're saving server space, this is another fantasy. I would challenge to you find a single instance of GS personnel, or a reviewer, recommending the deletion of DNFs from an active cache, simply to "clean up" a cache page.

Edited December 31, 2007 by Prime Suspect

[+Bad_CRC]

A lot of the time DNF logs help me more than the find logs. I don't want to be tipped off to where a cache is but going to a cache with an idea that someone searched somewhere without result is almost like having someone with you caching. With a single DNF I know that the cache might take a bit of hard looking before I find it and not to give up hope. With a lot of DNFs, especially in a row, I know that the cache might be gone completely.

 

I would hate for anyone to delete a log. Logs show that some effort, however slight, was put into the cache by a finder. I try and search to the level of the difficulty of the cache and if I don't end up finding it I post a log. I paperless cache using my PSP, and I don't run into any problems with anyones logs, long or short. Some owners manage their logs differently though but the rules allow the owners to do so.

 

excellent post.

[+TrailGators]

A lot of the time DNF logs help me more than the find logs. I don't want to be tipped off to where a cache is but going to a cache with an idea that someone searched somewhere without result is almost like having someone with you caching. With a single DNF I know that the cache might take a bit of hard looking before I find it and not to give up hope. With a lot of DNFs, especially in a row, I know that the cache might be gone completely.

 

I would hate for anyone to delete a log. Logs show that some effort, however slight, was put into the cache by a finder. I try and search to the level of the difficulty of the cache and if I don't end up finding it I post a log. I paperless cache using my PSP, and I don't run into any problems with anyones logs, long or short. Some owners manage their logs differently though but the rules allow the owners to do so.

Good post! By the way, how do you cache with a PSP? I smashed my Palm on a rock and would rather get a PSP if that would work!

[+Firespinner]

There have been a few times that I did not find the cache but didn't use the DNF feature. It was a personal choice though. In general if you hunt and don't find it, you should log a DNF. It doesn't mean the cache is missing. Multiple DNF's in a row might indicate a problem......or it could mean that its very well hidden. :-)

 

I chose on a few to log a note instead of DNF because I was hunting without a GPS and therefore felt like DNF wasn't fair since I wasn't "officially in the game" yet. Ok...so i know there's no 'official' but I felt like i wasn't fully playing yet. lol.

[+Ambrosia]

WRASTRO, perhaps you should let Anaheim Hider know about this thread. Perhaps it could help them to clear up some of the confusion they seem to have over what a DNF is for.

[+ar_kayaker]

Like many others have stated I consider my logs, founds, dnfs, or just notes, a part of my personal caching journal.

 

Since I already know that deleted logs are archived someplace, I wonder if GC would be willing to add a feature where you can at least access your own logs? I can already get to my own logs on archived caches, but not to individual logs that an owner may have deleted.

 

AK

[+Serial007]

A lot of the time DNF logs help me more than the find logs. I don't want to be tipped off to where a cache is but going to a cache with an idea that someone searched somewhere without result is almost like having someone with you caching. With a single DNF I know that the cache might take a bit of hard looking before I find it and not to give up hope. With a lot of DNFs, especially in a row, I know that the cache might be gone completely.

 

I would hate for anyone to delete a log. Logs show that some effort, however slight, was put into the cache by a finder. I try and search to the level of the difficulty of the cache and if I don't end up finding it I post a log. I paperless cache using my PSP, and I don't run into any problems with anyones logs, long or short. Some owners manage their logs differently though but the rules allow the owners to do so.

Good post! By the way, how do you cache with a PSP? I smashed my Palm on a rock and would rather get a PSP if that would work!

 

You make use of the built in browser but before you go caching, save the pages to memory stick. I ended up making my own little off line geocaching portal so that everything fit together seamlessly. I will eventually get around to making a full homebrew program that I can distribute but if you want more specific info on how to do it just pm me.

[+tozainamboku]

I've had a similar thing happen. Two of my DNF logs were deleted by a local hider who was "cleaning up" his cache page. One was a cache where he had done maintenance after my DNF and replaced a missing cache. The other was one that I had later gone back and found so I had both a DNF and a Found It log. Sure some cache owners may be a bit anal retentive about the control they exercise on their cache page. They like to keep the logs to just what they think is useful and not have a lot of wasted space. That is probably what happened in the other thread where a cache owner was deleting logs that were too long. There are cache finders who routinely delete their DNFs once they find the cache or when a cache owner confirms the cache was missing. It's likely that these cache owners see the DNF the same way. You probably won't convince them that the DNF is part of your caching history and you prefer to keep all the logs. There is no official meaning for either the DNF or the Found It log other that what the cache owner says it means. Deleting your DNFs or allowing someone else to claim a bonus find is left by the website to the cache owner. You can complain all you want, it's not likely that the site is going to change this. Do not deceive yourself that the logs on the cache pages are good for calculating your statistics or any cachers statistics. Do not believe that number of Find or DNFs mean any thing other than a count of the logs you made which were not deleted by a cache owner. If you need to keep track of your logs I suggest you maintain your own offline data base of Finds and DNFs and stop worrying about what the site shows.

[+webscouter.]

I'd like to suggest a time period in which a cache owner can delete a log. This would ensure that things like this do not happen.

 

Perhaps after a log has been in place for 3 days the ability to delete it goes away?

 

I know this will cause problems with cache owners that compare logs to online entries but it would have eliminated several post in the forums in the last week.

[+KJcachers]

I would like to hear form Groundspeak on this. Especially about storage space issues that were perported to be driving this DNF log issue.

[+coggins]

I would like to hear form Groundspeak on this. Especially about storage space issues that were perported to be driving this DNF log issue.

 

Does not compute...

 

Hitting the [DETETE] button on a log does not delete the log, it archives it. That's why after you do this the next page says that the log was archived. What this does is break the association between the log and the cache page. The log is still on the server. How does this save any server space?

 

As proof, try this:

1. watch a cache.

2. log a note to that watched cache.

3.click the [Delete Log] button to "delete" your log. In the next window click the [Yes] button to confirm your "delete". The following page will say:

"Log was deleted

 

The log entry has been deleted.

 

Archived"

4. Check you email account.

5. Once you receive an email about the watched cache, Flag the email.

6. Click the last link in the email that says "Remove from watchlist:"

7. You will be taken to your Watchlist page where you select the [Yes] button to confirm the remove and next you will end up on your watchlist page with a message that says that "Item has been removed from your watchlist."

8. Back to the email, click the link that says Visit cache listing... and at the cache page you will notice that you log is gone.

9. Go back to your flagged email and click on the link to visit the log.

10. It's still there, right? Will be next week too.

[+Team GeoBlast]

When I fired up my email this morning I had my first ever log deletion notice. I didn't even remember the cache so I went and checked it out. The log was a DNF from April for a cache I hunted while visiting the Anaheim area for a few days during Spring break. Nothing out of the ordinary. So I emailed the owner and asked why they deleted the log. My email and responses are posted below.

 

Has anyone ever encountered this philosophy before? It sure doesn't make any sense to me.

 

Email to Anaheim Hider:

 

Hi, I am curious as to why you deleted my DNF log from April on your (Anaheim) cache. There certainly can't be anything offensive about it. I searched and couldn't find it.

 

Log details below:

 

California Wednesday, April 04, 2007

WRASTRO couldn't find (Anaheim Cache)

 

George only had a few minutes at about 6:15 before heading back to the hotel for more Disney fun. With evening traffic it was impossible to give anything a good search. Such is caching life.

 

Response from Anaheim Hider:

 

On Sun, Dec 30, 2007 at 10:09am Anaheim Hider wrote:

 

Greetings.

 

The DNF feature was put in place to notify Owners (and other cachers) that a

cache is missing, or damaged, so we delete DNF's after we do cache

maintenance. This keeps the cache page uncluttered, and the DNF's in pocket

queries won"t discourage cachers from looking for the cache. It's back in

play, so enjoy the hunt.

 

See ya caching

Anaheim Hider

 

My response:

 

From: wrastro <wrastro@blarg.net>

To: Anaheim Hider

Subject: Re: [GEO] WRASTRO contacting Anaheim Hider from Geocaching.com

Date: Today 10:39am

I respectfully disagree with your view of the purpose of a DNF. The DNF feature is for the cacher to log that they searched for the cache and did not find it. My log that you deleted did not imply in any way that there was a problem with the cache. Clearly others found it after my DNF so you had full knowledge that there was not a problem. My DNF log from April will not appear in a PQ since they only show the last five logs so that has no impact in this case.

 

Owner notification is one part of it, but it is also part of the cache history as well as the cacher's hunting history. A DNF can describe the experience of the hunt and can be an alert for future cachers that there may be times when it is more difficult to search, or that some tool might be helpful.

 

Many of the best and most entertaining logs are the DNF posts describing cacher's experiences in trying to find a cache. They have nothing to do with notifying the owner that there is or may be a problem with the cache itself. It would be a sad thing to lose this history.

 

I have been caching for just over four years and this is the first time anyone has deleted one of my logs for any reason. It is your cache and you have the right to delete logs, but your reasoning is, in my experience, flawed.

 

Just out of curiousity, why haven't you deleted the remaining DNF logs from this cache? A quick check of some of your other caches also shows old DNF logs. Is this a new policy you have just adopted?

 

I've got an idea. How about requiring a hider to pass the Wonderlick test before they hide one? It really sounds to me that this person is confusing the "Needs Maintenance" feature with a DNF log to me. A DNF log is part of the caches history and is of equal or greater interest to me if I am considering looking for it.

 

As it has been rightly pointed out, the hider makes the rules. Your only option to be thankful that this is kind of thing is very rare and move on.

Edited December 31, 2007 by Team GeoBlast

[+ArcherDragoon]

Hey,

 

I have run across a couple caches in which the owner mentioned they would delete all DNF's to "keep the cache page clean"...

 

I wondered each time if they were trying to hide something about their cache. I agree with many of the other posts here...DNF's only add to the cache history and, in my opinion, are good indicators of the overall "difficulty" of a cache more so then the actually ratings at times.

 

I guess, move on and pay no attention to it and continue caching...

 

...though the discussion has been very informative on this subject...

 

Later,

ArcherDragoon

[+MaplessInSeattle]

Wow, deleting DNF?!?! What a horrible idea.

If I did that on my latest Multicache I would lose a large chunk of the cache's history, as well as critical information for future cachers.

There are also those of us that seek out the caches with large amounts of DNFs just to challenge ourselves.

If a cache has 5 finds and 4 DNFs I'm all about seeking out that cache.

Because either it sucks and needs maintenance, or that's one heck of a hunt.

[+PhxChem]

This will allow Geocaching.com to run more efficiently, and also clean up the

pages for the currently seeking cachers.

 

Wow, that post was chill inducing. Does this guy also stop by his cache everyday to make sure it's still there? It is his right. But we are allowed to sit back and wonder publicly who these people are.....

 

If GS is worried that much about space....they must be pi**ed about this thread!!

[+Kit Fox]

I had a DNF deleted once. The reason being was that the cache was hidden in the "outdoor restroom" of the local homeless. A year later he deleted the log, and sanitized all reference to the problems associated with the cache. I guess they didn't wan't anyone else to learn about their poor choice of cache hiding locations.

 

Regarding the hider of the cache in which the OP's log was deleted, all I can say is it must be nice to know so much that isn't true.

 

Delete DNFs to save bandwith, give me a break!

[+WRASTRO]

Sent a request to Anaheim Hider to reply to this post and/or to provide any supporting information regarding claims regarding posts and communications with Groundspeak staffers and veteran cachers. I am surprised by the angst this event has caused me. After all it IS just a game. Why sweat about a DNF for a non-descript nano hide three feet from a major street in an urban area? I guess it is because ONE cacher is imposing values on everyone else.

 

Happy New Year! One hour to go on the East coast of the US.

Edited January 1, 2008 by WRASTRO

[+Glenn]

I've encountered cache owners who like to "keep their caches logs clean" and "GSAK ready". Being a cache owner myself I think that deleting valid logs robs the cache of it's history and character. It will be interesting to hear from the owner of the cache that deleted your DNF log.

[+benh57]

I had a DNF deleted once. The reason being was that the cache was hidden in the "outdoor restroom" of the local homeless. A year later he deleted the log, and sanitized all reference to the problems associated with the cache. I guess they didn't wan't anyone else to learn about their poor choice of cache hiding locations.

 

If you want to make enemies, you could always create a public shared bookmark list entitled "Caches Hidden In Homeless Restrooms" and put that cache on it... The owner can't touch those.

 

I have actually seen public shared "XXCacher's DNF List" bookmark lists.

[+Glenn]

I had a DNF deleted once. The reason being was that the cache was hidden in the "outdoor restroom" of the local homeless. A year later he deleted the log, and sanitized all reference to the problems associated with the cache. I guess they didn't wan't anyone else to learn about their poor choice of cache hiding locations.

 

If you want to make enemies, you could always create a public shared bookmark list entitled "Caches Hidden In Homeless Restrooms" and put that cache on it... The owner can't touch those.

 

I have actually seen public shared "XXCacher's DNF List" bookmark lists.

 

Interesting idea. The OP can do the same thing. Create a bookmark list of his DNFs. Since bookmarks aren't listed in GSAK the cache owner shouldn't have a problem with it fouling the caches logs and messing with the GSAK status.

[+JRandJuju]

I use DNFs for 3 things

1 As a cache owner a DNF means I should check this cache.

2 If the cacher could not find in XX minutes I will need to allow more time to find this cache.

3 There may be reasons they could not get to cache. ie construction, the river/creek is to high.

 

I think the only times a owner should delete an entry it is in poor taste(profanity, racial etc) or if it tells information about the cache the owner wants kept private( the answer to a puzzle cache).

JR

[+The Jester]

I've encountered cache owners who like to "keep their caches logs clean" and "GSAK ready". Being a cache owner myself I think that deleting valid logs robs the cache of it's history and character. It will be interesting to hear from the owner of the cache that deleted your DNF log.

The "GSAK ready" line is too funny! I guess a lot of people don't know that GSAK can purge logs that are unwanted, so that anyone can edit out the logs that they don't want in their DB. I don't need the cache owner to decide what I need/want.

[+TrailGators]

Sent a request to Anaheim Hider to reply to this post and/or to provide any supporting information regarding claims regarding posts and communications with Groundspeak staffers and veteran cachers. I am surprised by the angst this event has caused me. After all it IS just a game. Why sweat about a DNF for a non-descript nano hide three feet from a major street in an urban area? I guess it is because ONE cacher is imposing values on everyone else.

 

Happy New Year! One hour to go on the East coast of the US.

My New Year's Resolution is not to sweat the small stuff. That might be a good one for you too Wrastro. Happy New Year!

[+WRASTRO]

Sent a request to Anaheim Hider to reply to this post and/or to provide any supporting information regarding claims regarding posts and communications with Groundspeak staffers and veteran cachers. I am surprised by the angst this event has caused me. After all it IS just a game. Why sweat about a DNF for a non-descript nano hide three feet from a major street in an urban area? I guess it is because ONE cacher is imposing values on everyone else.

 

Happy New Year! One hour to go on the East coast of the US.

My New Year's Resolution is not to sweat the small stuff. That might be a good one for you too Wrastro. Happy New Year!

 

Yeah, I don't know why this set me off like it did. I think it is the insane attitude of the cache owner and the stories they are fabricating. Well it is a new year and this is old news.

 

I need to go find some caches!

[+the pooks]

I really find the idea of deleting somebody's log against the spirit of the game. This is a voluntary organization - if somebody logged a log of any description (DNF, too long, too short, Copy & Paste, whatever) they did it because they wanted to, so who am I to tell them what they must do? As long as it is not offensive. Deleting someone's log is aggressive behaviour.

[+Jeep_Dog]

I completely agree with the position outlined in OP. I vehemently disagree with Anaheim Hider's reasoning for deleting the log, and furthermore find that reasoning ludicrous.

 

The cache owner's purview on this reigns supreme, unfortunately, and their bogus opinion trumps all of the others' stated here for that particular cache.

 

Personally, the only time I would delete ANY log would be in the case of "any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off topic, or not within the stated requirements."

 

In fact, I cannot remember ever deleting a log. I had considered it once on a "I forgot to bring a pen to sign the log" online found log - sent an email to the finder, asked them to return to the cache and sign, and that if I did not see their name in the log next maintenance run (within a month), I would delete their online log. The cache came up missing, so I gave them the benefit of the doubt (actually, I strongly suspected them of taking the cache in revenge for my email). That's the only deletion action I can even remember on my caches.

 

At any rate, have you considered a bookmark list that is titled "MY DNFs" and making it a public list? That is one aspect of your caching experience and this cache that you CAN control.

[+briansnat]

I sometimes enjoy going back and reading my old logs (DNFs and Found Its) and the thought that some clown would arbitrarily delete them to keep his "page clean" is galling. It may be his cache page, but it is MY log and MY memory. Deleting legit logs of any kind is something that should only be done in the most unusual of circumstances.

 

I don't know who the "veteran cachers" and "geocaching Website Designers" are that he has spoken with, but the the veteran cachers I know all leave DNFs on their cache pages. The intent of a DNF log is to allow you to log the result of your cache hunt if you don't find it. Nothing more or less.

 

DNF logs are costly to maintain? This statement is so absurd that it makes me think this guy is making things up. It's text. It takes up far, far less room than the photos we often submit with our logs.

[+zazth]

I've only deleted notes placed on cache pages not finds or did not finds. I'd only delete a found log if the person did not sign the log and I did not believe thay had actually found the cache.

DNFs are more highly sought for us on our caches than the found logs sometimes.

 

I put in DNFs let the owner know thay thier cache stumped us!

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

Rambler's Stress-reducing Mantra:

The best thing about geocaching is that it's open to everyone.

The worst thing about geocaching is... that it's open to everyone!

 

Play your game and don't sweat the rest!