DNF was missing, archived, logging question

[+Fairy Prankster]

A cache owner recently suggested that I add a find log on a missing cache of hers that I had previously logged as a DNF, since the cache wasn't there when I was searching, and was subsequently permanently archived. I have noticed other people doing that, but I didn't think it sounded quite right. I figure a DNF is a DNF, regardless of the reason. Although I think i was looking in the right place, who knows if would have found it where it there. Lots of times I've gone back for a DNF that was there, and have found it the second time. What's the etiquette?

[+TeamGumbo]

I wouldn't log that as a find.

 

I think she was just trying to be nice since you did make the effort.

[+Team Black-Cat]

The stock reply you are going to get is "It's your game. Play it the way you want". That really is the only way to do this and stay sane.

If you're asking for opinions, I would say it's a DNF (which you don't have to log if you don't want to, but that's another topic).

[+Mudfrog]

A cache owner recently suggested that I add a find log on a missing cache of hers that I had previously logged as a DNF, since the cache wasn't there when I was searching, and was subsequently permanently archived. I have noticed other people doing that, but I didn't think it sounded quite right. I figure a DNF is a DNF, regardless of the reason. Although I think i was looking in the right place, who knows if would have found it where it there. Lots of times I've gone back for a DNF that was there, and have found it the second time. What's the etiquette?

You'll get varying opinions but if you want to get technical about it, then look at what the initals D N F stand for. They stand for "Did Not Find", which is exactly what happened. The cache may be missing or the person may have given up their search without finding, These are just two of the many reasons for why a person didn't find the cache but the end result is exactly the same. The cache wasn't found!

 

Again, there are differing opinions on this so you have to decide what is right for you. Since you mentioned it though, i would go with your initial gut feeling and keep the dnf. You can try for the cache another day when she get's it replaced then actually find it and sign the log.

[+briansnat]

I wouldn't. I didn't find it. Didn't find it = DNF.

[+the hermit crabs]

... but I didn't think it sounded quite right.

Listen to that voice in your head.

[+Harry Dolphin]

If you didn't find it, you Did Not Find. IMHO. Someone offered me that option once. I declined, and said that I'd look for it when the cache was replaced.

[+BlueDeuce]

I wouldn't log that as a find.

 

I think she was just trying to be nice since you did make the effort.

 

The first one is always free.

 

I agree with VD, I think she was just trying to be nice.

[+Cav Scout]

I'd log it.

[+BlueDeuce]

I'd log it.

 

You'd log a cache you never found. Well, at least you're honest...in that regard.

[+baloo&bd]

If it ain't there, you can't find it.

[+Isonzo Karst]

think she was just trying to be nice since you did make the effort

 

and is also trying to relieve herself of the obligation to check and replace the cache promptly....

 

It's commonly done, with or without the owner's permission. But it strikes me as utterly absurd - logging a find on a cache that's missing?

[+Bad_CRC]

A cache owner recently suggested that I add a find log on a missing cache of hers... I didn't think it sounded quite right. What's the etiquette?

 

Sounds lame to me. I wouldn't do it.

 

Since it sounds wrong to you, I'd recommend that you don't do it either.

 

As others have said, this is an individual game, and you should play it how you want. Since this is on the forum now, someone will probably try to invent problems for you either way, so just do what feels best for how you play the game ... and have fun.

[+The Jester]

think she was just trying to be nice since you did make the effort

 

and is also trying to relieve herself of the obligation to check and replace the cache promptly....

Huh? Where did this come from? The cache has been archived - see the OP.

[+Hobo2]

I figure a DNF is a DNF, regardless of the reason.

 

Black or white, there is no gray... if you play by the rules. It is sure nice to see some people caching with integrity.

[+Zop]

A cache owner recently suggested that I add a find log on a missing cache of hers that I had previously logged as a DNF, since the cache wasn't there when I was searching, and was subsequently permanently archived. I have noticed other people doing that, but I didn't think it sounded quite right. I figure a DNF is a DNF, regardless of the reason. Although I think i was looking in the right place, who knows if would have found it where it there. Lots of times I've gone back for a DNF that was there, and have found it the second time. What's the etiquette?

 

I have been offered this option on a few occasions and have yet to take them up on it. However, I did recently have a cache go missing - it was a very easy 1x1.5 that should have been an extremely easy find. So when I received a few DNF's I knew it had to be missing. I considered this and knowing that the cachers who were kind enough to actually log a DNF would have found the cache had it been there, I offered the option to log just prior to my archiving the cache. Oh. And Yup! I'll do it again if the situation warrants.

 

My logic? These cachers did me a favor by logging the DNF in the first place! I can't visit each of my caches every weekend one doesn't get logged. By logging the DNF, they let me know that I need to take a look.

 

So, to me, the fact that they found that the cache was missing is as good as a find and I will honor it as such.

 

If this were one of my more difficult hides though.. I may have a different offer or none at all. Had the cache still been where intended, the whole topic would be moot.

 

While I haven't logged a DNF as a find as offered, there may just be that one that should have been so simple that I would take the offer and embrace my smiley.

[+simpjkee]

I would not log a find.

[+Ambrosia]

I've given a similar offer to a cacher when they DNF'd on one of our caches. But the only reason I did is because they found parts of the cache that had been trashed (by an animal, we believe). They didn't find the logs, but they found other things strewn about right at the cache site and took a picture of them. The cache was a 1 for difficulty, but a cache that was hard to get to (needed a 4x4). We archived it and told them they could log a find on the cache parts.

[Mushtang]

I agree with the majority. You didn't find it, you didn't sign the log, therefore you shouldn't log a Find.

 

But the owner said you could. So if you do anyway, I won't care.

[GPS-Hermit]

It doesn't much matter to me either way! Each plays the game their own way. My DNF'S are usually after an exhaustive search and would have been found if it was there. I would make the same offer she did - if it was impossible to find. I place caches to lure folks to a place I think is special. If they come and love it - my job is done. The cache is just entertainment. I truely believe the outing is what it is all about. The score is a measure of how much fun I've had. He who has the most fun wins.

Edited February 6, 2008 by GPS-Hermit

[+Renegade Knight]

A cache owner recently suggested that I add a find log on a missing cache of hers that I had previously logged as a DNF, since the cache wasn't there when I was searching, and was subsequently permanently archived. I have noticed other people doing that, but I didn't think it sounded quite right. I figure a DNF is a DNF, regardless of the reason. Although I think i was looking in the right place, who knows if would have found it where it there. Lots of times I've gone back for a DNF that was there, and have found it the second time. What's the etiquette?

 

You found the exact spot where the cache was. True it's not there. True you had the exact intended cache experience.

 

In the past I would have logged it. Now I wouldn't. In the past I've allowed a log like this. Now....maybe.

 

It's between you and the owner. They make the rules for their cache. Even if the owner lets you log it though, if you are not comfortable. Don't. No harm no foul.

[Geo-Joe-N-Josh]

I would say to go and find it. Then you got the find fair and square.

[+Okiebryan]

I think if you had found cache pieces at GZ, you get a find. If you find nothing and it turns out to be missing, DNF city.

[+poohstickz]

I think when you go looking for a cache that Isn't There it's somewhat likely that you'll end with the result that you Did Not Find that cache. Personally, I lean towards the school of thought that says when you Do Not Find a cache that you log that you Did Not Find that cache. There's a certain symmetry to that equation that appeals to me.

 

Now, should the owner subsequently decide to not replace said missing cache, my feeling on the matter is that the aforementioned cache still satisifies the condition of Not Being There and as it's Not There one still Did Not Find it.

[+Stargazer22]

I would go back and make the find, then log the find and let the owner know you went back.

I think she is being very nice to offer you that, but it really wasn't there the first time so you really didn't find it.

 

As a cache owner, I would get a nice warm fuzzy if someone went to the time and trouble to go back to one of my caches to make a find when they had missed it before. I would feel like I placed a cache that someone thought enough of to make a second trip to find.

[+briansnat]

You found the exact spot where the cache was. True it's not there.

 

If it's not there how does he know that beyond any doubt?

[+Fairy Prankster]

Thanks for all the replies. I went with my gut and left it as a DNF, since who knows if I really was looking where it was supposed to be. It has remained permanently archived, so it's never been an option to go back and make the find. I think the owner was just trying to be nice, since I wouldn't have the opportunity to look for it again.