Jump to content

Is logging a DNF really that hard?


Followers 5

Recommended Posts

Hi GeoFriends,

I have recently noticed that on a relatively new cache I hid that the are no DNFs logged. But that are a few references by cachers that they previously did not find the cache and returned. They only logged the find and not their previous DNFs.

 

"This was the second try. "

"When back after reading the info and could not believe I missed it."

"looked 4 about 15 minutes but i coundnt find it. So I came back today"

"I must admit that my first visit here was alittle hairy, as I was being watched! Second time I came after 7:30pm"

 

So, my question is why do you think people don't sign the cache logs with DNFs on Geocaching.com?

My thoughts are:

a ) their lazy

b ) they think DNFs make them look bad

 

Are there reasons that logging DNFs is an important action when not finding a cache?

I think, yes there is because:

a ) cache maintainers use this information to determine whether coordinates my be off (soft)

b ) cache maintainers use this information to adjust their difficultly/terrain ratings

c ) cache maintainers use this information to correctly set their attributes for their caches (e.g. not recommended at night, take less than 1 hour, etc.)

d ) muggle issues

 

What can be done to stress the importance of logging DNFs? How can we get cachers to log DNFs?

 

Additional info about my cache: My cache has 31 finds and 4 known (by not logged) DNFs. It has a difficultly rating of 1.5.

 

Your thoughts are important to me so please shed some light if you can.

 

Thanks,

ifloydian007

Link to comment

Too many cachers feel that logging a DNF somehow is the same as getting a "demerit" in school. Losing points sort of....

 

Despite the many values of logging the DNF - owners get a message - future finders get an idea of how hard to look - indicates somebody was looking etc..... Still I figure less than 1 in 3 DNFs is actually logged.

 

To be perfectly fair, I've seen comments in this very forum that some cachers will only log a DNF after a few visits to the cache or they will log only a single DNF even if they returned 5 times. I think those are valid points of view as well.

Link to comment

I always log them, but have never seen anyone ask cachers to log them in the cache description, maybe that is the first thing to try...

 

Yeah, I thought of that, but feel the cacher only visits the page at the time of logging the find so therefore they will probably not remember the DNF (or the date of the DNF) and will not log it.

 

I also think that if I put something like "Please log your DNFs! It is very important to cache maintainers." would probably be overlooked. You think?

 

How about every 10 log items I write a log message with the above text? That way it'll be seen.

 

To be perfectly fair, I've seen comments in this very forum that some cachers will only log a DNF after a few visits to the cache or they will log only a single DNF even if they returned 5 times. I think those are valid points of view as well.

But if you find it after 1 DNF then at lease you should log the DNF. If you find it after 5 DNF's then again maybe you should log 1 DNF... That way we know, which I believe is important for some of the reasons I commented about in the original post.

 

Thanks for you input.

Link to comment

So, my question is why do you think people don't sign the cache logs with DNFs on Geocaching.com?

My thoughts are:

a ) their lazy

b ) they think DNFs make them look bad

 

Interesting that, even though geocaching does not require logging of DNFs, there are only two alternatives as to why some people do not log all.

I do log most, after reading many such threads. But I can think of many other reasons.

c) Coords are obviously off, and you're inflating your ego. (Oops. Got a log deleted for that.)

d) Didn't care for the poison ivy/No Trespassing Signs/barking dog lunging at me

e) Not prepared to throw a lanyard through the window of the abandoned men's room

f) You forgot to mention that the park is only open on Wednesdays, between noon and 7 PM.

g) Should I really be running across the Interstate highway?

 

Hey! If I signed the cache log, it wouldn't be with a DNF! That would mean that I found it!

 

Oops. Only two possible categories available. So, I'll have to settle for "a ) their (?) lazy."

Though, I'm sure that there are many other possibilities.

Link to comment

Lets just say I have eyes on one of my caches and to say the amount of people that don't log DNF's is high.

 

I've been told that others have the same issue, so I don't worry about it too much.

I like to see the DNF's on my evil hides, shows me its tough, especially with a cacher that has 6,000finds...

 

Although its nice to see the DNF that really happened, just can't worry about them.

Link to comment

I think most cachers who choose not to log a DNF think of it as acknowledging some sort of failure and they don't like to admit they failed. In my experience it tends to be more likely that a newer cacher won't log a DNF and that a more experienced cacher will log one. I log a DNF or a note if I made an effort to find the cache. Most of the time it is a DNF. Sometimes I have a strange sense of pride when I log a DNF on a 1/1 that the last 75 cachers have all found. Of course there is also the coveted FTDNF!

Link to comment

I've only not logged two of my DNFs (which granted is half, but I've just started :unsure:) and those were my first two. Why? I was using a car GPS to try to find them, and I figured out that the stupid thing couldn't go off road (once I got to the second cache). I figured it really wouldn't be constructive to post DNFs for them, since it was my own stupid fault. I also couldn't figure out of to log at all. Once I figured out how to log, I had found them (with my shiny new eTrex) and didn't see the point in logging a DNF right before a Found It.

 

So, yeah, it's a relatively rare problem I imagine, but it IS a legitimate reason. I think.

Link to comment

I try to remember to log them. Logged one yesterday. I didn't say it wasn't there, just that I didn't find it, and the owner went right out and verified its existence and emailed me that it was still there. That's dedication for which I thanked him.

 

If I've failed to log a DNF, It's because I forgot. I don't think it's a failure. I also wish it wasn't a frowny face. A choice of faces would be nice. I don't feel sad that I don't find them. I usually have fun anyway.

 

If I made a decision not to log it, it's because I didn't look for it. If I saw that the area was full of poison ivy and didn't even get close to gz where I would actually started looking for it, I don't think that's relevant. It has no bearing on the cache status since I didn't actually look for it. If the park is closed and you can't get to ground zero, in my book that's not a DNF. It's a drive by.

 

But I do try to log them. I agree that with that information from other cachers I'd probably waste less gas going after caches that aren't there.

Link to comment

 

Are there reasons that logging DNFs is an important action when not finding a cache?

I think, yes there is because:

a ) cache maintainers use this information to determine whether coordinates my be off (soft)

b ) cache maintainers use this information to adjust their difficultly/terrain ratings

c ) cache maintainers use this information to correctly set their attributes for their caches (e.g. not recommended at night, take less than 1 hour, etc.)

d ) muggle issues

 

What can be done to stress the importance of logging DNFs? How can we get cachers to log DNFs?

 

ifloydian007

 

I sure agree with all of this. As a cache owner, I usually go check on any cache that has 2 DNF's in a row. If people don't DNF, how do I know that there is anything wrong with the cache?

 

I know it seems frustrating that most people don't DNF but I've just accepted it as people being people.

Link to comment

If I know I'm going to be returning to the cache site in the next couple of days, I won't log the DNF. It seems silly to log a DNF and then the next day come back and say I found it. I'm not sure if it's even an option to log twice on the same cache.

 

I tend to view a DNF as my final pronouncement on a cache. I guess that's not how ya'll see it? For example, we got seriously stumped on a cache in St. Louis (it was an awesome hide). Went once, didn't find it. Came back the next morning, the area was rife with muggles, turned around and left. Went back that afternoon and found the cache. Should I have logged 2 DNFs and then 1 find? How do you all do this?

Link to comment
Went once, didn't find it. Came back the next morning, the area was rife with muggles, turned around and left. Went back that afternoon and found the cache. Should I have logged 2 DNFs and then 1 find? How do you all do this?

 

I probably would have logged one DNF and one Found it. If I hunt it twice in the same day I'll combine the logs, but if the visits are on different days I will give them their own log.

 

I have some caches where I have logged 5+ DNFs simply because I searched 5+ times and didn't find them

Link to comment

If I know I'm going to be returning to the cache site in the next couple of days, I won't log the DNF. It seems silly to log a DNF and then the next day come back and say I found it. I'm not sure if it's even an option to log twice on the same cache.

 

I tend to view a DNF as my final pronouncement on a cache. I guess that's not how ya'll see it? For example, we got seriously stumped on a cache in St. Louis (it was an awesome hide). Went once, didn't find it. Came back the next morning, the area was rife with muggles, turned around and left. Went back that afternoon and found the cache. Should I have logged 2 DNFs and then 1 find? How do you all do this?

.

To me it's really easy; if I start looking for a cache, i.e., pushes 'goto' or similar on my GPS, I go look for it and do not find it, it's a DNF. If I go back and look for it again I guess I could circumvent my own rule by not pushing 'goto'... No, just kidding.

 

We currently have 2 caches with 'active DNS's' on, caches that we did not find but others did. When we go back to look for them, and we will, and if we don't find them, that will be another two DNF's and we'll keep doing that until we either find the cache, learn that it's gone or give up. We never did give up on any caches yet but there's a first for everything.

Link to comment

I log most DNFs, but I won't bother to log (and won't return to hunt the cache) if:

  • I reach the cache vicinity and it's utterly lame or muggle-infested
  • I look for a moment and realize that the "1" difficulty rating is nonsense (sandbagging)
  • I get the sense that the cache placement is malicious (e.g., homeless encampment)
  • I believe logging a DNF would cause some sort of backlash

Certain cache owners thrive on DNFs. They relish logs that describe protracted, frustrating, fruitless searches. That's fine as long as potential searchers know what they're in for. But these sadists aren't content with willing opponents; they want unsuspecting victims, too, so they understate the difficulty rating or otherwise sandbag searchers. Pfft. I don't need to feed their sickness.

 

In one case, I posted an upbeat DNF log with cool photos and a self-deprecating account of my search, only to find out that from the next find log that the description, hint and difficulty rating were totally false. I deleted my log.

Link to comment

I log most DNFs, but I won't bother to log (and won't return to hunt the cache) if:

 

[*]I believe logging a DNF would cause some sort of backlash

 

 

I'm just curious but what sort of "backlash" would you expect from a DNF? Have you known cache owners to get angry if you log a DNF? I'm just wondering. We've never encountered any backlash that we know of and we now have proudly logged 130 DNF's as of today.

Link to comment

If I know I'm going to be returning to the cache site in the next couple of days, I won't log the DNF. It seems silly to log a DNF and then the next day come back and say I found it. I'm not sure if it's even an option to log twice on the same cache.

 

I tend to view a DNF as my final pronouncement on a cache. I guess that's not how ya'll see it? For example, we got seriously stumped on a cache in St. Louis (it was an awesome hide). Went once, didn't find it. Came back the next morning, the area was rife with muggles, turned around and left. Went back that afternoon and found the cache. Should I have logged 2 DNFs and then 1 find? How do you all do this?

 

If I hit the 'Go To' button on the GPSr, and return to the vehicle without signing the log, it's a DNF, and I log online as such. I have a personal protocol to search for around twenty minutes, on as many as three occasions, before I ignore a cache. Normally I don't log the second DNF, but I do mention my efforts for the third try, and say I've given up on the cache. Sometimes, after a few months go by, I will return to one of these and try again, in which case I log my results. The elapsed time between any of my efforts is irrelevant (could be hours apart, could be days or months). If I can't approach GZ due to heathens in the area, it's a note, since I didn't actually get to look for the cache.

 

It appears there needs to be a change in attitude about DNFs, but I have no idea how to bring it about.

 

Basically, my logs are a trip report...I am telling what happened that day. If I found the cache, GREAT! If I didn't, then I didn't and I need to try again...doesn't mean I'm stupid (although I frequently FEEL stupid when I finally do find it, it was RIGHT THERE IN MY FACE!).

 

Perhaps there should be another log type created:

IGU or I GIVE UP! If you log one, the cache is automatically put on your ignore list.

Edited by AZcachemeister
Link to comment

I admit that I do not like to log DNFs (mostly because I'm disappointed) but I do log them routinely. The only exception is when I plan to do a quick grab and go (usually on my way to somewhere else) and find out that I'm going to need more time to search than I left myself. This is usually because of muggles around GZ or - most recently - I found out the fake-rock cache was in a pile of about 500 rocks and I only gave myself 2 minutes to look.

 

I figure I'll come back to search when my timing is better. If I don't find the cache after at least a thorough look around, then I will definitely log the DNF.

Link to comment

I'm just curious but what sort of "backlash" would you expect from a DNF? Have you known cache owners to get angry if you log a DNF? I'm just wondering. We've never encountered any backlash that we know of and we now have proudly logged 130 DNF's as of today.

 

Early in our caching career we DNFed a "cleverly hidden" cache, and our log inspired other cachers to swarm into the area and conduct a scorched-earth search until they made the find. We returned and saw that the area had been transformed, not for the better. So we're leery of logging a DNF where it might inspire a destructive search. Really not much of an issue these days, as we've learned to pass up caches of this kind.

Link to comment

When I stated geocaching, I promised myself to log all my dnf's... after that I came up with exceptions.

To this day I have 7 unlogged dnf's, 5 of which are dns's (did not search):

 

GC7468 - stopped 1km ATCF from the cache, no time to get to GZ, DNS;

GC12Z08 - 100's of muggles, the hint wasn't useful (now it's updated), DNS;

GCQCNC - bad reception, couldn't find the house (!!) at GZ, 1000's of muggles (some kind of fiesta), DNS;

GC110J0 - no hint, difficulty 5 (at that time, now 3.5 + hint), very limited time - searched for less than 10 minutes;

GC12NF0 - solved the 'armchair mystery', ended up on the wrong side of the river, no time to return... DNS;

GC14EFQ - limited time, too many cars passing (at 3:15 AM) - searched for less than 2 minutes;

GCVN8A - Too many muggles, DNS.

 

The exception that I come up with, for not logging the dnf's, were:

- didn't arrive to GZ, considered that in this situation I was only hiking/sightseeing, not geocaching, so I didn't log.

- arrived to GZ, did not search because of muggles. I considered this to be my fault, because the cache description mentioned them.

- arrived to GZ, searched for (very) few minutes. Today I will log them as DNF, but at that time I didn't because:

- 1 - it was a difficulty 5, and I had only 2 finds, considered myself 'unworthy' of that cache;

- 2 - it was in an exposed location, i have been spotted, it was night time, near an airport, in a foreign country, just before my trip back. I didn't want to compromise the hide or have the police called on me, so I quit the search. It could have been my first FTF, 2612 km from my home. Considered logging a dnf, but didn't because of many small reasons (it would reflect badly on me, it was a TB prison, somebody already found it by the time I got home, etc).

 

Today, If I search for a cache I log it (found it, dnf or note); if I didn't search or didn't reach GZ, then a note only if I have something useful to say.

Link to comment

I always log them, but have never seen anyone ask cachers to log them in the cache description, maybe that is the first thing to try...

 

Yeah, I thought of that, but feel the cacher only visits the page at the time of logging the find so therefore they will probably not remember the DNF (or the date of the DNF) and will not log it.

 

I also think that if I put something like "Please log your DNFs! It is very important to cache maintainers." would probably be overlooked. You think?

 

How about every 10 log items I write a log message with the above text? That way it'll be seen.

 

To be perfectly fair, I've seen comments in this very forum that some cachers will only log a DNF after a few visits to the cache or they will log only a single DNF even if they returned 5 times. I think those are valid points of view as well.

But if you find it after 1 DNF then at lease you should log the DNF. If you find it after 5 DNF's then again maybe you should log 1 DNF... That way we know, which I believe is important for some of the reasons I commented about in the original post.

 

Thanks for you input.

 

I will usually log a DNF each time I tried to find the cache and did not find it. Each DNF may have a different story to go with it. One of the things that you did not list as a benefit to logging DNFs is that it provides other cachers information about that cache that may determine whether or not it's worth looking for. A cache that has multiple finds followed by a series of DNFs might actually be missing. If the log for a DNF indicates that they couldn't find it due to high muggle activity I am more likely going to search for it at a time when there are few people about.

Link to comment

I always log them, but have never seen anyone ask cachers to log them in the cache description, maybe that is the first thing to try...

 

Yeah, I thought of that, but feel the cacher only visits the page at the time of logging the find so therefore they will probably not remember the DNF (or the date of the DNF) and will not log it.

 

I also think that if I put something like "Please log your DNFs! It is very important to cache maintainers." would probably be overlooked. You think?

 

How about every 10 log items I write a log message with the above text? That way it'll be seen.

 

To be perfectly fair, I've seen comments in this very forum that some cachers will only log a DNF after a few visits to the cache or they will log only a single DNF even if they returned 5 times. I think those are valid points of view as well.

But if you find it after 1 DNF then at lease you should log the DNF. If you find it after 5 DNF's then again maybe you should log 1 DNF... That way we know, which I believe is important for some of the reasons I commented about in the original post.

 

Thanks for you input.

 

I will usually log a DNF each time I tried to find the cache and did not find it. Each DNF may have a different story to go with it. One of the things that you did not list as a benefit to logging DNFs is that it provides other cachers information about that cache that may determine whether or not it's worth looking for. A cache that has multiple finds followed by a series of DNFs might actually be missing. If the log for a DNF indicates that they couldn't find it due to high muggle activity I am more likely going to search for it at a time when there are few people about.

Link to comment

Hi GeoFriends,

I have recently noticed that on a relatively new cache I hid that the are no DNFs logged. But that are a few references by cachers that they previously did not find the cache and returned. They only logged the find and not their previous DNFs.

 

"This was the second try. "

"When back after reading the info and could not believe I missed it."

"looked 4 about 15 minutes but i coundnt find it. So I came back today"

"I must admit that my first visit here was alittle hairy, as I was being watched! Second time I came after 7:30pm"

 

So, my question is why do you think people don't sign the cache logs with DNFs on Geocaching.com?

My thoughts are:

a ) their lazy

b ) they think DNFs make them look bad

 

Thanks,

ifloydian007

 

 

Why do geocachers not log DNFs? I think the answer is "b"!

 

Nobody wants to look like a LOSER!! Who wants to wimp out and say.....(high falsetto voice) "Oh dear! I simply cannot find it!" :lol:

 

NO WAY!

 

Hey! We live in a MACHO world of "CAN DO"!

 

You want ME to leave a wimpy DNF at a cache where other red-blooded Rambos have sniffed, peed and left their mark? NO WAY! :huh:

 

So how does a cacher "resolve" not reporting a DNF?

 

It goes something like this......"Well, I really don't have time to finish this hunt (after spending 45 minutes looking fruitlessly!) so I will just come back. Don't havta report a DNF because I am NOT FINISHED LOOKING! Ya gotta problem with that??? HUH!!!!???" :huh:

 

The above may be a reason for not reporting DNFs.....or it might just be a bunch of hooey! ;)

Link to comment

At first, I used to think DNF's were a failure on my part somehow. Now that I've got a few hundred finds under my belt, I don't see it that way. I also don't feel the need to log all of my DNF's because of the way I might have gone looking for something.

 

If I'm going out on a caching run and intend on really trying to find a cache, I'll log a DNF if I didn't find it. But if I happen upon an area where a cache is and I casually look for it (5 mins max) and I don't find it, I won't log it as a DNF because I really did not try my best to find it. I don't feel the need to log a DNF on a cache if I was just being lazy and didn't really try too hard.

 

For me, DNF's are when you looked hard for a cache and did not find it.

Link to comment

 

It appears there needs to be a change in attitude about DNFs, but I have no idea how to bring it about.

 

Perhaps there should be another log type created:

IGU or I GIVE UP! If you log one, the cache is automatically put on your ignore list.

 

I think giving an option for a DNF to use something other than a frowny would increase the DNF logs.

 

:huh: this guy for some things

 

;) this guy for others

 

:huh: maybe him sometimes

 

:lol: or him

 

I will often put in my DNF logs, "oh well, I had fun", or "I will return", or if I've DNF'd a few times "I'll put this on my watch list and return after someone else finds it"

 

Also, another good reason to log DNF's for me is so I can go back and find the cache page easily "...now, which cache was it that I couldn't find...Oh, there it is on my cache history!"

Link to comment

I used to log all my DNFs then a couple issues came up, the worst being a cache was presumed gone because of two or three DNFs ending with mine. Cache owner was out of state at the time. Someone from somewhere else with a TB in the cache panicked started sending out emails. A previous finder verified the cache was still there but the ball was rolling, cache was temporarily disabled. I forget all the particulars but being new I felt it was all my fault and became gun shy about logging DNFs.

Link to comment

I tend to log all my DNFs, I like them! I just wish the stats reflected not just how many caches you found but how many you've searched for.

To me not finding a cache just adds to my satisfaction when I go back and find it, especially if it's one of those, "d'oh, I can't believe I didn't look there" things!

I think most people don't log DNFs because they think it's a failure of some kind, but I do agree that logging them helps the cache owner.

Link to comment

It appears there needs to be a change in attitude about DNFs, but I have no idea how to bring it about. Perhaps there should be another log type created:

IGU or I GIVE UP! If you log one, the cache is automatically put on your ignore list.

 

I think giving an option for a DNF to use something other than a frowny would increase the DNF logs.

:huh: this guy for some things

:lol: this guy for others

:wub: maybe him sometimes

;) or him

 

I will often put in my DNF logs, "oh well, I had fun", or "I will return", or if I've DNF'd a few times "I'll put this on my watch list and return after someone else finds it"

 

Also, another good reason to log DNF's for me is so I can go back and find the cache page easily "...now, which cache was it that I couldn't find...Oh, there it is on my cache history!"

 

I like this idea. It would help bypass the childhood training of "...if you can't say anything nice..." Wasn't me, it was the little :huh: dude.

Link to comment

I used to log all my DNFs then a couple issues came up, the worst being a cache was presumed gone because of two or three DNFs ending with mine. Cache owner was out of state at the time. Someone from somewhere else with a TB in the cache panicked started sending out emails. A previous finder verified the cache was still there but the ball was rolling, cache was temporarily disabled. I forget all the particulars but being new I felt it was all my fault and became gun shy about logging DNFs.

 

You were fine. There is a growing subculture that says a cache can't even have a whiff of a problem or ACTION MUST BE TAKEN!, DISABLE IT!, ARCHIVE IT! BUT, OH MY GOSH WE CAN'T BE SUBJECTED TO THIS INSANITY! 3 DNF'S ON A 4 STAR CACHE, CLEARLY IT'S GONE AND NOT MERELY A HARD FIND!!!!!!!!.

 

Back to reality. Someetimes a cache is just hard to find. That's what the ratings are for.

Link to comment

We don't have a problem logging our DNFs, when we do not find. If we feel we haven't given it a decent try because of time restraints, muggles, just plain creepy feelings, or whatever, we don't log it. Lots of times, we go back, but mostly only log the ones that we truly tried to find, but couldn't for whatever reason. It's not laziness or not wanting to look bad, but why cause disruption for a DNF when we didn't actually try all that hard???

Link to comment

I think people don't log DNF's because it will make them look bad. I always log them so the owner can know if there is an issue with the cache. Plus, sometimes there is a funny story or situation that goes in hand with the DNF.

 

In our caching area there is this cache: GC1AZYM. It's a very good cache idea. If you want your smiley then you need to have at least 100 DNFs and you must prove it with a screen shot. I can't wait to find it I have 51 more to go!

Link to comment

When I first started, I logged DNF’s every time, until I had more DNF’s than finds! At that point it represented a badge of shame to me (I don’t take failure well!). As time went on I adopted an attitude of “well, I looked really hard and I just could not find it, so I’ll log it just incase it is missing”, or, “I didn’t really spend as much “quality time” looking for this cache, so I’ll pretend I was not here this time and not log at all”. After I became a cache owner I log almost every DNF both for the benefit of the cache owner, and the Geocachers that follow me. I have however adopted a policy of only making one log entry for the first DNF and then just editing that log with additional DNF notes (also changing the date so it moves to the top of the log list). The reason I do this is for the paperless cachers out there who can only get the last 5 log entries (unless they are wireless internet equipped) on their PDA’s. It makes for a long log entry if there are 3 or more DNF’s listed on my entry, but at least the 4 logs before mine can still be read, and when the cache owner reads the log (after their e-mail notification) they can see that it is just me that can’t find it, and it is probably not really missing. As a cache owner, if I had 2 DNF’s in a row from different cachers (especially from cachers with more than 200 finds) on one of my caches, I’d be out to check on it in a heartbeat! If it was just one guy that was having problems (by logging more than 1 DNF), I would probably send him an e-mail with encouraging words, and offer an extra clue if he wanted it. Logging DNF’s are important, but it would be nice to select something other than a “frowney face” emoticon to express the experience.

Link to comment
So, my question is why do you think people don't sign the cache logs with DNFs on Geocaching.com?
I think there is a little misunderstanding of what a DNF is for a lot of people. Once I found myself owning enough caches to have to make maintenance runs a couple times a week, I got a new perspective on DNF's and we also use in our searching.

 

If we reach the cache area and something beyond our control stops our search, such as a thunderstorm rolling in (in Florida this time of year is every day between 4pm-10pm), police parked 10-feet from GZ, bumper crop of poison ivy protecting GZ, grunting sounds in the darkness, etc, then we only post a note that we were halted and we'll be back. if we put forth any decent effort at GZ to search for the cache but can't find it then we post a DNF. As an owner, a DNF alerts us that there may be problems with the hide, so we keep a closer eye on it. If someone didn't even really look, I'd rather not have that DNF pop up and put us on a higher state of alert. When the log emails come thru, the ones with the term "couldn't find" in the title are the first ones we read. The others are entertainment :lol:

Link to comment

So, my question is why do you think people don't sign the cache logs with DNFs on Geocaching.com?

My thoughts are:

a ) their lazy

b ) they think DNFs make them look bad

...

What can be done to stress the importance of logging DNFs? How can we get cachers to log DNFs?

 

The cachers who have posted to this thread saying that they log most or all DNFs have something in common: They all have managed to find some incentive to do so. Their DNFs are a to-do list, or a diary of their adventures, or a way to help the cache owner, or notify other seekers of a cache's status. Without a positive incentive, it's really hard to get anyone to do anything. Logging DNFs, for most folks, lacks a positive incentive and may have any of a number of disincentives.

 

All you have to work with is persuasion, so right off the bat, I'd say that it might help not to ascribe characteristics like laziness or vanity to the people you're trying to win over.

Link to comment

I used to log all my DNFs then a couple issues came up, the worst being a cache was presumed gone because of two or three DNFs ending with mine. Cache owner was out of state at the time. Someone from somewhere else with a TB in the cache panicked started sending out emails. A previous finder verified the cache was still there but the ball was rolling, cache was temporarily disabled. I forget all the particulars but being new I felt it was all my fault and became gun shy about logging DNFs.

 

You were fine. There is a growing subculture that says a cache can't even have a whiff of a problem or ACTION MUST BE TAKEN!, DISABLE IT!, ARCHIVE IT! BUT, OH MY GOSH WE CAN'T BE SUBJECTED TO THIS INSANITY! 3 DNF'S ON A 4 STAR CACHE, CLEARLY IT'S GONE AND NOT MERELY A HARD FIND!!!!!!!!.

 

Back to reality. Someetimes a cache is just hard to find. That's what the ratings are for.

 

4 years later, I am more schooled and would handle the whole thing differently. It wasn't a hard find, I was just inexperienced. That is why I weigh a DNF by someone caching for less than 6 months different from someone caching for 2 years. Few people are great at something right off, there is a learning curve.

Link to comment

I've logged A DNF on a cache and the had the owner of the cache e-mail me and let me know it was OK to log a find. Since he would have never known it was missing if it weren't for my DNF log. I of course declined, but the point is the cache owner depends on us cachers to help let him know what shape his cache is in.

Link to comment

for all those saying you will not log DNFs if you cannot search for cache due to poison ivy, wrong side of river, muggles, fallen trees or closed roads... This is exactly the kind of info I WANT as a searcher! I don't want to wade through poison ivy, or at least I would like to know so I can suit up properly... If there are tons of muggles, maybe I should go at night, or wear a fake moustache... DNFs are as much for searchers after you as for owners.

 

Especially nowadays with everyone just logging 'tftc' on finds, it seems the good info usually (almost always) comes from DNFs (which in my area are few and far between).

Link to comment

My cache has had at least 3 DNFs that I know of. One person who emailed and asked for help did not log his DNF. And two people who DNF'ed but went back and changed their log to Found Its.

 

I wish people would log their DNFs as it more accurately represents the history of my cache. I've had people tell me its a little challenging but you'd never know that from all the smileys. And I suspect there have been more DNFs than I know about.

 

I'm not sure if people change their logs because they don't know they shouldn't or because they don't want the DNF to "look bad." *shrug*

 

I've never edited a log to change a frownie to a smiley.

Link to comment

I guess I've been looking at this in the wrong way....I'm new so I look at each trip as a learning experience. I have one that I have visited twice and two that I have visited once and haven't found yet. I've told myself when I go back the third time (each time armed with a little bit more experience) I will log the DNF if I haven't found it. Three strikes and your out and all....but based on the conversations I see here I guess I should have logged DNF's on each of the four visits.

 

There is another one that I had to give up on when the muggles started popping out of the woodwork. I misled myself on the "quick grab" and the muggles made it impossible to stand there and think about it. I don't think I gave that one a fair hunt....Like Arnold "I'll be back!" Does this one constitute a DNF?

 

There are two more that I abandoned before closing in on the cache because the terrain was not what I expected or the full summer foliage made the approach something I was not willing to do. I will go back to each of these when winter comes and I am prepared for the terrain as it exists. I don't think these two trips merit a DNF...am I wrong about that?

 

And finally there was one that was just not there (a 1/1 with no surprises). I got back and checked the logs and saw a DNF posted after I loaded the cache in the GPS. I chose to email the owner and ask him to check...he seemed happy with that and was out of town at the time and told me when he would check on it. I chose to do it that way because I felt that as a newbee (30 finds) I was as likely to not find it as it was not there because it had been muggled. I guess that should have DNF #5.

 

Is my thinking on this wrong. I am not worried about posting DNF's when I'm truly stumped by a cache AND I don't intend to return for another try, but I kind of figured that I should satisfy myself that I was really stumped by the hide. Like my tag line says...Even the blind squirrel will find the nut if he digs around long enough ;)

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...