What counts as a DNF?

[+TheVaultrons]

What's your threshold for logging a DNF? I think there are some situations in which technically the cache was not found, but a DNF is inappropriate. Here are some examples. Which would you consider a DNF?

 

- Got to the area of a cache and changed our minds (see my log for GCQ62D).

 

- Made an attempt at a cache but discovered that we were seriously ill-equiped/the cache was inaccessible, aborted our attempt very quickly (within 3 or 4 mintues) and never made it to GZ (see GC554A) so no real attempt was made.

 

- Actually made it to GZ, could not find cache but not ready to give up on it and we might return (see GC119C0). (We actually logged a DNF on our second attempt at this one).

 

Your thoughts?

[+hukilaulau]

What's your threshold for logging a DNF? I think there are some situations in which technically the cache was not found, but a DNF is inappropriate. Here are some examples. Which would you consider a DNF?

 

- Got to the area of a cache and changed our minds (see my log for GCQ62D).

 

- Made an attempt at a cache but discovered that we were seriously ill-equiped/the cache was inaccessible, aborted our attempt very quickly (within 3 or 4 mintues) and never made it to GZ (see GC554A) so no real attempt was made.

 

- Actually made it to GZ, could not find cache but not ready to give up on it and we might return (see GC119C0). (We actually logged a DNF on our second attempt at this one).

 

Your thoughts?

-DNF

-DNF

-DNF

But everyone's threshold is different!

[+WRASTRO]

1 - a note or no log

2 - DNF

3 - DNF

 

YMMV

[+Prfctly Mad]

1. Note or no Note

2. Note or no Note

3. DNF

 

Basically if I actually get in the area of ground zero and Start poking in the bushes It is a DNF if I cannot make it to GZ or change my Mind I normally will not log or note anything.

[+Team Cotati]

No.

No.

Yes.

[+Trucker Lee]

If I make a search without luck, I don't do a "happy dance" and log a DNF.

 

If I blow it off and never open the car door, that is not a DNF but a ride in the countryside.

[+two-lerts]

OK this is a newbie question but... If I log a DNF then go back and find the cache, do I edit the original log entry changing it to a find or do I leave the DNF as is and make a new log entry as a find? I would think the later but when I look at logs of caches I might want to look for it seems as if many people go back and edit DNFs, changing them to finds when they go back and find.

[+WRASTRO]

OK this is a newbie question but... If I log a DNF then go back and find the cache, do I edit the original log entry changing it to a find or do I leave the DNF as is and make a new log entry as a find? I would think the later but when I look at logs of caches I might want to look for it seems as if many people go back and edit DNFs, changing them to finds when they go back and find.

 

When I was new to the game I edited previous logs but then I figured out that was a kind of revisionist history. Write a new log for your find.

[+Renegade Knight]

Didn't get to ground zero to look = no log unless the story of why is worth the telling.

 

Got to ground zero, looked, but something came up before I had finished looking. That's a note.

 

Got to ground zero. Looked everywhere I could think of and gave up head hung in shame because I could not find the cache. That's a DNF.

[+Cedar Grove Seekers]

Note

 

Note (assuming I was never in a position to begin the search)

 

DNF

[+UncleJimbo]

What's your threshold for logging a DNF? I think there are some situations in which technically the cache was not found, but a DNF is inappropriate. Here are some examples. Which would you consider a DNF?

 

- Got to the area of a cache and changed our minds (see my log for GCQ62D).

Not a DNF. Did not "try to find".

 

- Made an attempt at a cache but discovered that we were seriously ill-equiped/the cache was inaccessible, aborted our attempt very quickly (within 3 or 4 mintues) and never made it to GZ (see GC554A) so no real attempt was made.

Not a DNF. Never made it to GZ, so never really "tried to find".

 

- Actually made it to GZ, could not find cache but not ready to give up on it and we might return (see GC119C0). (We actually logged a DNF on our second attempt at this one).

I would log a DNF, and then a find if and when I went back and found it.

 

To me, it is only a "Did Not Find" if I seriously tried to find it at GZ.

 

Cheers

[+briansnat]

DNF

DNF

DNF

 

My personal criteria are if I plug the coordinates of the cache into my GPS, hit GOTO and come up empty it's a DNF. I think the walk to the cache is as much a part of the hunt as is peeking under park benches and poking around rock piles.

Edited January 27, 2008 by briansnat

[LordEd]

Note to inform others of the potential snow issue as was done

 

Note or no log

 

DNF: made an effort

 

As long as I make a reasonable effort at a cache, I will usually log a DNF for each attempt. i remember one hiking style cache that we attempted to get to, but could not find the path up the mountain. Since we didn't get within 100m of the cache, we just logged a n ote.

 

There are a few caches in this area where I have 3 or more DNF logged entries.

 

As a cache owner, I like to see DNF entries (or any log entry). It lets me know that the cache is still being attempted and could indicate a problem. On one of my difficult caches, I tend to get email questions of a not-found attempt with no DNF log entry.

[+briansnat]

OK this is a newbie question but... If I log a DNF then go back and find the cache, do I edit the original log entry changing it to a find or do I leave the DNF as is and make a new log entry as a find? I would think the later but when I look at logs of caches I might want to look for it seems as if many people go back and edit DNFs, changing them to finds when they go back and find.

 

The normal practice is to leave your DNF and log a Found It for your successful hunt.

 

First, the owner will not get notification of your find if you just edit your log. If he was thinking of checking on the cache because of your DNF and he isn't notified of your subsequent find, he may make an unnecessary trip.

 

Second, DNFs and Found Its are useful information to other cachers. If I see a cache with nothing but smileys in the log, I'll assume it's a easy find and I may give up after a short search, assuming it's gone. If I see DNFs sprinkled among the logs I'll know that it's not a slam dunk find and probably put some extra time into the search.

 

Finally, all your logs are part of the history of the cache. What's the point of altering the cache history?

[+TeamGumbo]

Note

DNF

DNF

[Rostropovich]

I won't log a DNF unless I have searched everywhere within fifty feet of the cache for a total of 30 minutes or more. That way I am sure that I know the cache is probaly not there and can help the cache owner with my DNFs rather than several I glanced at the area so. I will log a DNF if the surrounding area is almost void of hiding spots and I have checked all of the areas I will spend a much shorter time before posting a DNF. Your third search seems to fit in this category. Note: If more than a couple of DNFs in a row are posted the cache owner will probally check to see if cache is still there.

 

1. No log

2.No log

3.DNF

[Motorcycle_Mama]

1. If something about the cache location (muggles, dogs, etc) made me abort the search, then I'd post a DNF so that others would have that information. If I just changed my mind and decided to go do something else instead, then I'd post nothing.

 

2. I'd post a DNF so that others, who might also arrive unprepared, would have this information.

 

3. DNF for sure

[majormajor42]

new scenario: too many muggles about and you never get out of the car, on a cache that is close to the parking. I've sometimes logged a DNF, sometimes not. It usually depends on if there is a story worth telling, or useful information to pass on to others. I wouldn't use a "note" though for this or the other scenarios above, but that's just me.

[+JohnnyVegas]

No note, if it is a area full of low lifes, I will not go back once we went to a cache and GZ was in a homeless camp site ane there was a nasty pit bull tied up at GZ. I post a SBA and the cache was archived.

 

No Note, if the cache is rated a 5 or 4 for difficulty unless I have whatever is required before I leave home if will not be going the cache, no reason for a note. If I get to the area of the cache and find that it is listed as a 1,2 or 3 for difficluty and you need a boat or some other gear to get to the cache I will post a note re. the wrong ratting.

 

If I make it to GZ and I do not find the cache I will post a DNF

[+theosus]

What's your threshold for logging a DNF? I think there are some situations in which technically the cache was not found, but a DNF is inappropriate. Here are some examples. Which would you consider a DNF?

 

- Got to the area of a cache and changed our minds (see my log for GCQ62D).

 

- Made an attempt at a cache but discovered that we were seriously ill-equiped/the cache was inaccessible, aborted our attempt very quickly (within 3 or 4 mintues) and never made it to GZ (see GC554A) so no real attempt was made.

 

- Actually made it to GZ, could not find cache but not ready to give up on it and we might return (see GC119C0). (We actually logged a DNF on our second attempt at this one).

 

Your thoughts?

 

I always looked at "DNF" as more a clue to fellow cachers and the owner that the cache may have been moved/stolen/abducted by aliens. After a few "DNF's" in a row...an owner may want to go check the cache. I know if I see one and the last two or three people report DNF - I wont go looking for it until I see another "found" log. I would only log a DNF if I got out and made a worthwhile effort at finding the cache. As for your quesitons:

 

1. nothing - wouldnt mention it. putting a DNF on this one is a dis-service UNLESS you put "hey I drove up and never got out (i.e. was in my work clothes and didnt know about the briars)".

2. maybe a note - "this cache requires a machete and rock climbing gear to retreive - not equipped well - will try later"

3. DNF

 

I actually know a guy that will try at least twice to find one before logging a DNF.

[+Fuchsiamagic]

Difinitively, if you didn't sign the log - it's a DNF, whatever the circumstances.

 

Logs are interesting for others to read, especially if there's a funny story, but in my opinion, if the text you write won't help the owner in any way, (eg too many muggles) there is no point in logging a DNF as there was no problem with the cache itself. Just try again later.

[+Miragee]

What's your threshold for logging a DNF?

 

<snip>

I like to think of my logs as an "online journal" of my caching adventures. I log every visit to a cache so I can remember what I did on a particular day. I would not go back to "Edit" a log to change the type from Note or DNF to "Found it." That would change both my own caching History and the History of the cache itself.

 

For the situations presented by the OP, I would probably log:

 

Note

Note, or possibly a DNF

DNF

[Neos2]

In general:

I write a DNF if something about the cache or it's environment kept me from finding it. I don't see a DNF as a signal that I am "done" looking for the cache. I don't change my logs when I find the cache.

 

I post a DNF any time I have new info that might help others: too many people around? a policeman parked next to the cache? the groundskeeping crew have hacked the bushes to the ground around GZ? --I post three different DNFs.

If I went to the cache site and was ready to start the hunt, but my son called me just then saying he needed a ride, I wouldn't post a DNF because the reason I bailed on the cache had absolutely nothing to do with the cache.

 

I certainly don't see a DNF as an indication that the cache is (necessarily) missing just because I don't find it, no matter how well or long I look for it.

If I truely suspect it may be missing I log my DNF and shoot the cache owner a note saying how and where I looked so they can judge whether they need to check on the cache.

 

As to your specific examples, I might have posted DNFs on all three caches you mention, and here's my reasoning: You live in an area that gets a bit of winter snow, and you bailed on these caches because of the snow.

GCQ62D-a snowbank blocking the road increased the walk to the cache.

GC554A-your husband sank into snow to his waist and snowshoes are needed right now.

GC119C0- you didn't want to dig around in the snow.

 

Whether you really need to post a DNF vs a note is a personal choice, but either way, I applaud the fact that you gave other cachers additional information they may need if they go after the cache in the next couple of days.

Some cachers might want to put these cache on their list of caches to do when there is no snow.

Some cachers would still go, but they'd allow extra time or be prepared with special equipment.

Some cachers might want to do the cache right then just because of the extra challenge.

[+hukilaulau]

In general:

I write a DNF if something about the cache or it's environment kept me from finding it. I don't see a DNF as a signal that I am "done" looking for the cache. I don't change my logs when I find the cache.

 

I post a DNF any time I have new info that might help others: too many people around? a policeman parked next to the cache? the groundskeeping crew have hacked the bushes to the ground around GZ? --I post three different DNFs.

If I went to the cache site and was ready to start the hunt, but my son called me just then saying he needed a ride, I wouldn't post a DNF because the reason I bailed on the cache had absolutely nothing to do with the cache.

 

I certainly don't see a DNF as an indication that the cache is (necessarily) missing just because I don't find it, no matter how well or long I look for it.

If I truely suspect it may be missing I log my DNF and shoot the cache owner a note saying how and where I looked so they can judge whether they need to check on the cache.

 

As to your specific examples, I might have posted DNFs on all three caches you mention, and here's my reasoning: You live in an area that gets a bit of winter snow, and you bailed on these caches because of the snow.

GCQ62D-a snowbank blocking the road increased the walk to the cache.

GC554A-your husband sank into snow to his waist and snowshoes are needed right now.

GC119C0- you didn't want to dig around in the snow.

 

Whether you really need to post a DNF vs a note is a personal choice, but either way, I applaud the fact that you gave other cachers additional information they may need if they go after the cache in the next couple of days.

Some cachers might want to put these cache on their list of caches to do when there is no snow.

Some cachers would still go, but they'd allow extra time or be prepared with special equipment.

Some cachers might want to do the cache right then just because of the extra challenge.

This explains it so well it's worth repeating. I'm surprised at the number of people who would post a note rather than a DNF for two out of three of your examples. Why make things more complicated than they have to be? In all three of your examples you had the intention of finding a cache and something directly related to the hunt stopped you.

[+Rattlebars]

DNF

DNF

DNF

 

My personal criteria are if I plug the coordinates of the cache into my GPS, hit GOTO and come up empty it's a DNF. I think the walk to the cache is as much a part of the hunt as is peeking under park benches and poking around rock piles.

 

You're not helping other cachers or the owner by logging DNF for the ones you didn't even try (#1 & #2). That gives a false indication and as you state in a later post:

 

First, the owner will not get notification of your find if you just edit your log. If he was thinking of checking on the cache because of your DNF and he isn't notified of your subsequent find, he may make an unnecessary trip.

 

Second, DNFs and Found Its are useful information to other cachers. If I see a cache with nothing but smileys in the log, I'll assume it's a easy find and I may give up after a short search, assuming it's gone. If I see DNFs sprinkled among the logs I'll know that it's not a slam dunk find and probably put some extra time into the search.

 

Those two posts seem contradictory. The first considers only your personal records and may be misleading to the other folks involved (anyone who may seek or the owner). Perhaps the DNF for instance #1 and #2 should be kept in a personal database such as GSAK and a note or nothing written for the log on GC.

 

I think:

#1 should be just a note or not

#2 should be just a note or not

#3 DNF

 

Logging DNF's for the first two instances may cause a potential seeker to pass up a good cache or it may cause the owner to make an unnecessary trip to fix perfectly secure cache.

 

A DNF means DID NOT FIND. It doesn't mean DID NOT TRY.

 

NOTE to BRAIN: I'm not trying to pick on you, but you gave such good examples of both sides if the issue I thought maybe....

[+hukilaulau]

 

You're not helping other cachers or the owner by logging DNF for the ones you didn't even try (#1 & #2). That gives a false indication and as you state in a later post:

 

But he DID "try" on both those examples. Certainly the DNF note should say something about the reason for not finding it. I really don't mind if people decide to log a note instead of DNF. What I react to is faulty logic...

[+briansnat]

You're not helping other cachers or the owner by logging DNF for the ones you didn't even try (#1 & #2). That gives a false indication and as you state in a later post:

 

As I see it, in all 3 cases I did try. I think a cache hunt is more than just peeking under park benches and looking under rocks. Getting there is a part of cache hunt. To me the hunt begins the moment I hit GOTO on my GPS.

 

Logging DNF's for the first two instances may cause a potential seeker to pass up a good cache or it may cause the owner to make an unnecessary trip to fix perfectly secure cache.

 

It's not like the log doesn't have a box where you can explain the situation. If I'm a cache owner and I see in the DNF log that you were stymied because you couldn't find legal parking, I'm not going to run out and check on the cache. But I might add parking coordinates to the page.

Edited January 28, 2008 by briansnat

[+Annie & PB]

For us, we generally don't post a DNF if we DNL (Did Not Look). Those are two completely different things.

 

There is no point to a DNF if you got to the spot and saw a big puddle & couldn't be bothered crossing it, or a bunch of blackberry/bramble/gorse and weren't properly dressed fight through it. If you post a DNF in those cases you may be giving the owner or the next potential cacher false information that leads them to believe the cache actually isn't there or is a really difficult find, when it was really the case that you couldn't be bothered looking (for what ever reason) or were not appropriately prepared.

 

It MAY be quite appropriate though to post a note or a maintenace needed to let the owner or next cacher know about the situation, but not a DNF if you actually didn't even look.

 

If it is a muggle situation we may post a DNF or a note depending. For some urban caches for example, muggles are part of what has to be negoiated to make the find - in that case it is probably right to post a DNF (as we would have had to recently when a muggle was sleeping on the park bench we * thought* we needed to check) if muggles prevent you from making the final approach.

 

Annie

Edited January 28, 2008 by Annie & PB

[+JohnTee]

This recent 'Found' smiley on one of my caches . . .

 

"Found area but not the cache. Thanks for bringing us here to learn history."

 

The experienced (300 some odd caches) geocacher logged it as a find. I wonder if he would accept that for one of his own??? Maybe I'll stop by and log one, "Looked at your cache page in Google Satellite. Found area, but not the cache. Thanks for the cache."

 

Cache On!

 

JohnTee

[+briansnat]

There is no point to a DNF if you got to the spot and saw a big puddle & couldn't be bothered crossing it, or a bunch of blackberry/bramble/gorse and weren't properly dressed fight through it. If you post a DNF in those cases you may be giving the owner or the next potential cacher false information that leads them to believe the cache actually isn't there or is a really difficult find, when it was really the case that you couldn't be bothered looking (for what ever reason) or were not appropriately prepared.

 

If you encounter things that prevent your completing the search there certainly is a point in posting a DNF. If you are stopped by a bunch of blackberry/bramble/gorse, the next sercher may see the log and be prepared.

 

As long as you explain yourself in the log there is no danger of the owner or next finder thinking that the cache isn't there.

 

If you were turned around by that bramble stand and didn't log a DNF and 5 cachers after you did the same thing, the owner will never know that perhaps he should raise his terrain rating. More information is better.

 

If you log the DNF you might have the added benefit of getting a hint from the owner about a better way to approach the cache. I know I've done it.

[+TrailGators]

Didn't get to ground zero to look = no log unless the story of why is worth the telling.

 

Got to ground zero, looked, but something came up before I had finished looking. That's a note.

 

Got to ground zero. Looked everywhere I could think of and gave up head hung in shame because I could not find the cache. That's a DNF.

Ditto.

[+Rattlebars]

 

As I see it, in all 3 cases I did try. I think a cache hunt is more than just peeking under park benches and looking under rocks. Getting there is a part of cache hunt. To me the hunt begins the moment I hit GOTO on my GPS.

----

 

It's not like the log doesn't have a box where you can explain the situation. If I'm a cache owner and I see in the DNF log that you were stymied because you couldn't find legal parking, I'm not going to run out and check on the cache. But I might add parking coordinates to the page.

 

I felt your initial DNF DNF DNF post was a bit cavalier and it didn't mention qualifying the DNF with a detailed log entry. But I don't see that in all three cases you did try. In the first case, it would be like me sitting here in Liberty Ohio and saying, "Gee, Brian, I'm sorry I could not find your keys" while never leaving the chair I'm sitting in. It implies that I did try to find your keys, but could not.

 

Even with a qualifying log that would explain to the owner that the reason for the DNF was entirely YOUR choice and nothing else is still a bit self-oriented. Simply hitting the goto button and then logging a DNF if you never left your driveway litters the history of the cache with less than useful clutter.

 

No log would be my choice for both #1 and #2. I don't feel that the public record of a cache is for my own personal database or history. There are other people involved.

[Hamsterbator]

Your thoughts?

 

I can't imagine that anyone really gives a rat's behind what you do, and I mean that in a positive way. That's the beauty of Geocaching: as long as you replace the cache and don't get yourself in trouble, it doesn't matter what you do.

 

I personally don't log DNFs unless I'm absolutely sure I'm in the right spot and I think the cache might be missing. Does anyone care if I log or don't log? Of course not.

 

There are very, very few rules in geocaching. That's why I participate.

[+Mudfrog]

What's your threshold for logging a DNF? I think there are some situations in which technically the cache was not found, but a DNF is inappropriate. Here are some examples. Which would you consider a DNF?

 

- Got to the area of a cache and changed our minds (see my log for GCQ62D).

 

- Made an attempt at a cache but discovered that we were seriously ill-equiped/the cache was inaccessible, aborted our attempt very quickly (within 3 or 4 mintues) and never made it to GZ (see GC554A) so no real attempt was made.

 

- Actually made it to GZ, could not find cache but not ready to give up on it and we might return (see GC119C0). (We actually logged a DNF on our second attempt at this one).

 

Your thoughts?

All three of the examples given in your post are DNFs because you punched in the coordinates, took off to locate the cache but DID NOT FIND the cache. Doesn't matter what the reason was that you gave up searching. The bottom line is that you initiated the search and DID NOT FIND the cache!

 

Leave your DNF, it's nothing to be ashamed of and it adds to the history of the cache. Tell your story, that's what that log field is there for. There is plenty of of room there to say that you never made it to ground zero, there were too many briars, you didn't have the right equipment, something else came up, your car broke down, etc,,,.

[+briansnat]

Even with a qualifying log that would explain to the owner that the reason for the DNF was entirely YOUR choice and nothing else is still a bit self-oriented. Simply hitting the goto button and then logging a DNF if you never left your driveway litters the history of the cache with less than useful clutter.

 

Let's not take it to extremes.

 

No log would be my choice for both #1 and #2. I don't feel that the public record of a cache is for my own personal database or history. There are other people involved.

 

Which is precisely why I do log those DNFs. The more feedback the owner gets the better. The more information other geocachers have, the better. These DNF logs often contain important information.

 

If I drive around for a half hour and can't find legal parking and log that as a DNF, the next searcher may know that parking can be an issue and do a bit more research before heading out. The owner may decide to add parking coordinates.

 

If I'm turned around because there is a swamp between me and the cache, my DNF log will warn subsequent searchers. They can then look for other routes, or bring appropriate equipment.

 

As a cache owner I want to see DNFs if people are attempting the cache and not reaching it. There have been many times these led me to update my cache page to help make the experience more in line with what I envisioned when I placed the cache.

 

For example, if I meant to create a cache where the challenge is in getting there and I'm not seeing DNFs, I'll think that I failed. Similarly, if I meant for the walk to be easy and find that people are not able to reach the cache because they keep approaching from the wrong direction, I'll post trailhead coordinates to make things easier. I won't know this stuff if they aren't logging DNFs.

Edited January 28, 2008 by briansnat

[+Mudfrog]

Your thoughts?

 

I can't imagine that anyone really gives a rat's behind what you do, and I mean that in a positive way. That's the beauty of Geocaching: as long as you replace the cache and don't get yourself in trouble, it doesn't matter what you do.

 

I personally don't log DNFs unless I'm absolutely sure I'm in the right spot and I think the cache might be missing. Does anyone care if I log or don't log? Of course not.

 

There are very, very few rules in geocaching. That's why I participate.

So tell us, how do you determine that you are absolutely sure that you are in the right spot and that the cache might be missing? Unless the cache owner or someone who found the cache previously is with you, you don't really know. I've had quite a few DNFs and would have bet my life on a few of them that they were missing. I always log my DNFs and alot of them were indeed gone but guess what? There were some that were right where they were supposed to be and i just flat out missed finding them.

 

People do care if you log them or not. DNFs can be helpful to the owner of the cache and to future finders as well. Say the DNF is submitted because that cacher didn't have the right equipment or came across lots of poison ivy,,, Might the owner and/or the next potential finder find that information useful?

 

Granted, in the OP's first scenario, it wouldn't make much difference to anyone else whether he logged it or not. However, in his 2nd and 3rd scenarios, a DNF would have provided info that could be useful to others. Still, it doesn't matter though as DNF simply means one thing, DID NOT FIND. It doesn't imply that somone is a loser or anything else!

[+PlantAKiss]

NOTE to BRAIN: I'm not trying to pick on you, but you gave such good examples of both sides if the issue I thought maybe....

 

Are you calling Brian a brain?... ...or are you talking to yourself?

 

Its interesting how many different views people have of the same rule of play--from the "if you thought about going for it, log it" to "I looked and didn't find it but I'll log it when I do."

 

If I made a reasonable effort to look, I log a DNF. If I drive up to posted coords and then have to leave for some reason (gotta pee!), I do not log it. There have been a number of situations where I did not log: arrived to late (dark) to hunt, park closed or closing, ridiculous muggle swarm, area looks unsafe, "creepy guy in car," etc. In a few of these situations, I have made a log anyway but I don't feel required to do so.

Edited January 28, 2008 by PlantAKiss

[+StarBrand]

If I got my GPS out and turned it on, slected a cache, hit goto, and in some way started off either driving or walking toward the selected cache -if I don't end with a find - then I log a DNF. Some of those logs are the best stories I have.

 

DNF = Did Not Find - I started but Did Not Find - so I log a DNF.

Edited January 28, 2008 by StarBrand

[+UncleJimbo]

If I got my GPS out and turned it on, slected a cache, hit goto, and in some way started off either driving or walking toward the selected cache -if I don't end with a find - then I log a DNF. Some of those logs are the best stories I have.

 

DNF = Did Not Find - I started but Did Not Find - so I log a DNF.

These might be great stories, but why not simply log them as notes, not DNFs? Such DNFs (for example, "got in my car, turned on GPSr, drove half way to the cache, but ran out of gas") are not much help to the people who screen out caches that have 1 or 2 DNFs to avoid looking for a cache that might be missing.

[+StarBrand]

If I got my GPS out and turned it on, slected a cache, hit goto, and in some way started off either driving or walking toward the selected cache -if I don't end with a find - then I log a DNF. Some of those logs are the best stories I have.

 

DNF = Did Not Find - I started but Did Not Find - so I log a DNF.

These might be great stories, but why not simply log them as notes, not DNFs? Such DNFs (for example, "got in my car, turned on GPSr, drove half way to the cache, but ran out of gas") are not much help to the people who screen out caches that have 1 or 2 DNFs to avoid looking for a cache that might be missing.

 

But I Didn't Find the Cache and I set out to do that. As Briansnat said above - even those are good information for future seekers and feedback for owners. In your example, make sure your Gas tank is full.

 

I never take a DNF to be equivalent to a missing cache. Just means it didn't get found. Read the logs, easy to tell the difference.

[+UncleJimbo]

If I got my GPS out and turned it on, slected a cache, hit goto, and in some way started off either driving or walking toward the selected cache -if I don't end with a find - then I log a DNF. Some of those logs are the best stories I have.

 

DNF = Did Not Find - I started but Did Not Find - so I log a DNF.

These might be great stories, but why not simply log them as notes, not DNFs? Such DNFs (for example, "got in my car, turned on GPSr, drove half way to the cache, but ran out of gas") are not much help to the people who screen out caches that have 1 or 2 DNFs to avoid looking for a cache that might be missing.

 

But I Didn't Find the Cache and I set out to do that. As Briansnat said above - even those are good information for future seekers and feedback for owners. In your example, make sure your Gas tank is full.

 

I never take a DNF to be equivalent to a missing cache. Just means it didn't get found. Read the logs, easy to tell the difference.

Well, in my opinion logging a DNF when you did not at least get to GZ does more harm than good. A note serves the purpose of telling the story and doesn't confuse people (who just count the DNF frowns) that you actually searched for the cache.

[+FatherAndProgeny]

I am relatively new (Since Nov 2007) and So my thoughts are from a non seasoned perspective. It is just my opinion on how I like to play the game.

 

When I look for caches to go to, I look to see if there are more than 3 DNFs. I usually do not spend a lot of time reading why they are a DNF unless I REALLY REALLY want to do the cache. If a person starts out and does not get to ground zero I believe a note is better. It will explain what you did without putting the stigma that the cache may be missing.

 

I do realize that I SHOULD read the logs, but I like to do things on the fly and be surprized so I just load my GPS and go. Reading ahead of time will probably get me there better and probably get a few more finds but often reading will give away a clue and spoil my surprize.

 

For example, this weekend I did GC15KNG "Who's Watching You!" and if I had read the cache page ahead of time I would not have had near the WOW experience that I had. The cache completely surprized me and I loved it!

 

Not saying this is what anyone other than me should be doing, but it is how I get my kicks. If there were DNFs logged because of people not getting to GZ because they ran out of gas or changed their mind, that cache would not be on my GPS and I would have missed a treat.

 

For people who are going to read ahead, a Note will be read just like a DNF. People will act accordingly based on the Note. A DNF might discourage someone from going to the cache.

 

Basically I log DNF if I get to GZ and even attempt a search. If I come and it is too dark or too many muggles or some other reason to abort, I do not DNF but note as I really did not search.

 

Just a newbies 2 cents worth. Don't spend it all at once.

[+Rattlebars]

I agree with FatherAndProgeny, but won't quote since you already read the post likely.

 

I finally (about time) researched the OP's logs and feel that they did the perfectly correct procedure. First instance was an informative note. Second instance was an informative note. Third, an informative DNF.

 

DNF's, just by virtue of the blue faced frown, have a stigma (good word FatherAndProgeny). Especially to the cache seekers who filter by "DNF's sprinkled among the recent logs."

 

To leave a DNF log that you ran out of gas ... if a seeker sets out knowing the distance to a cache and is in danger of running out of gas .... nothing more need said.

 

I believe the OP has a good grasp of the etiquette of logging DNF's. I agree with their assessment.

[+two-lerts]

This really is getting funny!

[+StarBrand]

I am relatively new (Since Nov 2007) and So my thoughts are from a non seasoned perspective. It is just my opinion on how I like to play the game.

 

When I look for caches to go to, I look to see if there are more than 3 DNFs. I usually do not spend a lot of time reading why they are a DNF unless I REALLY REALLY want to do the cache. If a person starts out and does not get to ground zero I believe a note is better. It will explain what you did without putting the stigma that the cache may be missing.

 

I do realize that I SHOULD read the logs, but I like to do things on the fly and be surprized so I just load my GPS and go. Reading ahead of time will probably get me there better and probably get a few more finds but often reading will give away a clue and spoil my surprize.

 

For example, this weekend I did GC15KNG "Who's Watching You!" and if I had read the cache page ahead of time I would not have had near the WOW experience that I had. The cache completely surprized me and I loved it!

 

Not saying this is what anyone other than me should be doing, but it is how I get my kicks. If there were DNFs logged because of people not getting to GZ because they ran out of gas or changed their mind, that cache would not be on my GPS and I would have missed a treat.

 

For people who are going to read ahead, a Note will be read just like a DNF. People will act accordingly based on the Note. A DNF might discourage someone from going to the cache.

 

Basically I log DNF if I get to GZ and even attempt a search. If I come and it is too dark or too many muggles or some other reason to abort, I do not DNF but note as I really did not search.

 

Just a newbies 2 cents worth. Don't spend it all at once.

That is just my point - you are assigning that negative "stigma" to the DNF log. I don't. I don't think most cachers do (my experience). I don't think DNF logs were ever meant to be some kind of demerit status to either cachers or caches. They are just informational logs. The information is not the log type but rather what the log has to say. I strongly believe the journey to GZ to be a BIG part of geocaching - it isn't just about the time spent at GZ. That is why l post a DNF if I started off to find but in the end Did Not Find.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

If I got my GPS out and turned it on, slected a cache, hit goto, and in some way started off either driving or walking toward the selected cache -if I don't end with a find - then I log a DNF. Some of those logs are the best stories I have.

 

DNF = Did Not Find - I started but Did Not Find - so I log a DNF.

These might be great stories, but why not simply log them as notes, not DNFs? Such DNFs (for example, "got in my car, turned on GPSr, drove half way to the cache, but ran out of gas") are not much help to the people who screen out caches that have 1 or 2 DNFs to avoid looking for a cache that might be missing.

 

But I Didn't Find the Cache and I set out to do that. As Briansnat said above - even those are good information for future seekers and feedback for owners. In your example, make sure your Gas tank is full.

 

I never take a DNF to be equivalent to a missing cache. Just means it didn't get found. Read the logs, easy to tell the difference.

 

It may also help to define "Didn't Find". Last weekend I went to search for a cache which has the following on the listing: "To claim this cache you have to sign the log not just find the container." It doesn't say what might be required to sign the log. Since I had just found a cache about a tenth of a mile away I went to check and see what was required to actually access the log. I got to GZ, found the container, even touched it with a stick, but since it was attached to something about 10' off the ground I could not sign the log.

 

In my case, I wrote a Note.

 

I have on quite a few occasions gone on reconniassance missions for caches to determine how/when I might want to search for it when I am in the area later.

[+mm_dancer]

usually if i get into the area and begin searching then ill log a DNF, but if i dont look at all i wont, DNFs arent a bad thing, its more to alert the cache owner that there is possibly a problem, if i dont even search i dont want to alert the owner of anything, or else ill put a DNF and say, went by today but didnt have time to search, will return or something so that they know the cache is (most likely) safe!

 

but its a very individual game

play how you like! []

[Neos2]

I am relatively new (Since Nov 2007) and So my thoughts are from a non seasoned perspective. It is just my opinion on how I like to play the game.

 

When I look for caches to go to, I look to see if there are more than 3 DNFs. I usually do not spend a lot of time reading why they are a DNF unless I REALLY REALLY want to do the cache. If a person starts out and does not get to ground zero I believe a note is better. It will explain what you did without putting the stigma that the cache may be missing. [...]

That is just my point - you are assigning that negative "stigma" to the DNF log. I don't. I don't think most cachers do (my experience). I don't think DNF logs were ever meant to be some kind of demerit status to either cachers or caches. They are just informational logs. The information is not the log type but rather what the log has to say. I strongly believe the journey to GZ to be a BIG part of geocaching - it isn't just about the time spent at GZ. That is why l post a DNF if I started off to find but in the end Did Not Find.

While I wouldn't log a DNF if I ran out of gas etc (because I don't think that has anything to do with the cache or it's environment), I do agree with StarBrand that a DNF does not "stigmatize" a cache.

 

I use GSAK, and it shows me the status of the last four logs. If I see a cache that has two or three DNFs, I will read the cache page before I decide whether or not to go after the cache. If you don't want to read the cache page, you could read the DNF logs.

 

I read the cache page before I hunt a cache. Far too often, I've read about folks who run into problems because they don't read the cache page. There is often info there about where to park, how to avoid dangers or private property, hours the cache might not be available, etc. At a bare minimum I skim the cache page to any sign of warnings about things like that.

 

Perhaps you might think about it this way, too. Often my husband and I cache with another couple. We all log separately. If we go to a cache and don't find it, there will be four DNF logs on that cache. Someone else could go there two minutes after us and find the cache in 30 seconds. Just because I can't find it doesn't mean it's not there. So if you are skipping caches because my friends and I missed them, then you probably are going to miss out on a lot of fun--and you may miss out on some nice finds, too!

[+Bad_CRC]

As soon as I step out of the car, it's either a find or a DNF.

 

I usually log my experience either way (unless it's a lame cache) so if I didn't find it because I decided I'd rather go home and eat, or because a rabid ferret was standing on the container, I'm still logging it.