Is there shame in a DNF?

1.5k · October 28, 2008

Thanks, all. I had a feeling what the responses would be and got a kick out of reading them. Now, if only my local cachers in Boise would do the same

October 28, 2008

Only losers double post in the forums.

No, not paranoid.....technically I believe that goes as schizophrenic.

Until you edited it out, anyway. Quasi-schizo?

At any rate, now you can concentrate on worrying whether you should officially be logging as a team.

:laughing:

~*

October 28, 2008

"Is there shame in a DNF?"

Of course there is. It's an admission of failure. How do I know? Those were the very words told me by a cacher when I asked about his "Finally found on my 6th try" log, after noting no DNFs had been filed.

The very next cache I hid, I made it a requirement that a DNF must be filed to get a hint. Plus, everyone filing a DNF would get the SAME first hint....and 2nd DNF's would earn the same 2nd hint etc. This very same guy promptly filed a DNF on it, & I sent him the hint. Couple days later, I get an e-mail saying he'd logged another DNF .....so sent him the 2nd hint. Later I was browsing & found his "2nd" DNF - he had just edited the first one. Since then, I've seen where he goes back & edits out the DNF once he records a find. Now there's you a guy with an aversion to DNF's!!!

Interestingly enough - I's just this afternoon swapping tales with another cacher about a new series he'd put out, all "3's" & higher based on 'putdown' remarks being made that his hides were exceptionally easy....and he thought it notable, all the requests for hints he was getting, but no DNFs were being filed.

Also interesting - a new hide gets a couple of finds spaced 3-4 days apart, but no DNFs. I suddenly get a PM asking me to verify the hide's still there; they think it's gone because they "searched every square millimeter". Next day I drove the 8 miles to the cache, which, to get to the nearest available parking spot you have to drive thru a field with foot-high grass. There were more tire-marks than there was upright grass! Reminder - NO DNF's.....not even from the team who asked me to verify.

Which goes hand-in-hand with something I'm sure most cachers have experienced....go to do maintenance or a requested verification on a cache, & find nearly every square inch of vegetation stomped down and/or ripped away, every physical object within 30 yards practically stripped bare or torn apart or bent or broken - and left that way - and there's (1) been only 2, 3 or 4 finds recorded.....and maybe a single DNF, if even that! Obviously, the recent invasive plagues of locusts & starving monkeys went unreported by the local newspaper.

And finally, there's the 'Hound Dogs' (which of course are the real 'Experts') who do a run -- usually in teams of 2-4 -- on the 10 new caches you put out in one side of town, and they score finds for 8 or 9 of them, ALL AROUND the one elusive hide....and yet not a single DNF logged nor mentioned on that one .....by even one of the team members. (Like they didn't go after that one too.) (Yeah, r-i-i-i-i-i-ght!!)

I'm in heavy agreement with the several others who've mentioned that DNFs make both the most interesting reading, AND the most (for me) memorable adventures! Apparently few others around here see it that way.

So yeah, mark this area ('Down East', NC) as "non-DNF prone". Nobody likes to admit failure. Especially those who "never fail".

~*

October 28, 2008

Best post here yet Star*Hopper!

It's a shame. I enjoy both reading and writing DNF logs.

I have to admit...I'm building and hiding caches that aren't that easy to find. I'm looking for those DNF logs!

I immediately emailed the one and only seeker that logged a DNF on one of mine asking if they wanted a hint (Didn't need one, they guessed right, dunno why they DNFed).

I think the most fun in this game (And I'm only speaking from my perspective here) is a really really tough hunt. I know this flies in the face of the '7 minute rule' people...but I've had lots of caches take me more than one try, several taking ~6 and sometimes I'll spend an hour or two on-site looking so I've got a few finds that have taken me at least 10 hours of searching! (All have a DNF log from me. I usually log my first DNF, maybe a middle one if there are lots, and then I always write about how many tries and how much time it took in my find log)

So when I started hiding, those are the types of caches I put out, the ones where you may look at it, you may even pick it up...but you still might not realize you've found it.

The majority of the find logs on my caches talk about being stumped for a while, not realizing they had the cache in hand a few times during the hunt, or almost giving up before making the grab. I love reading those!

Does that sound like the makings of a 50-1 Find to DNF log ratio? :laughing:

I think ultimately it's going to end up backfiring on them though...All the lack of posted DNFs is doing is sending me back into the workshop ratcheting up the evil cammo factor farther and farther with each new hide. I know I'm not the only person out there that will return to a cache and end up spending several hours at GZ before making the grab and since that's how I have the most fun, that's what I want to give back to the game.

Actually, we'll have to see how it goes with my most recent hide...It's gotten way less finds than my other suburban hides after the first weekend (the one I mentioned in my last post). Other than 2 finds I haven't checked the paper log to verify, there have been no DNFs (And I was told that two people have walked away so far by someone I met up with that was there looking) and 2 other finds, one being the guy I saw there whenI found it out of place and the other was someone that called him when they were stumped.

Hmmmmmmm........

I should probably start writing something about that on the cache pages..."Please log your DNFs or my subsequent hides will blend into the environment even better than the one that just stumped you."

And something about being willing to email them a hint if the log a DNF. I don't want them to not find it...I just want them to scratch their heads for a while first!

2.6k · October 28, 2008

NO......we log them all and then WATCH the cache......well over 50% turned out not to be there.

I just looked it up and we have 226 No Finds........this works out to 5 % but as I said above over half were not there so we miss only around 2%.

Of course thats two people caching each having a GPS and each having slightly different search techniques.

Keep in mind DNF means didn't find IT.....if there is no IT then what.

I feel a true DNF is when you don't find a cache that is actually there. :laughing:

October 28, 2008

It's a doggone shame that more people don't post their DNFs. When you carefully hide a sadistically camouflaged nano (soft coords, of course), the whole point is to get those DNF logs describing the misery and frustration each non-finder experienced as he tried and failed to win the hunter-versus-hider battle of wits. The flaw is that the victim has to cooperate. We need hidden cameras.

October 28, 2008

It's a doggone shame that more people don't post their DNFs. When you carefully hide a sadistically camouflaged nano (soft coords, of course), the whole point is to get those DNF logs describing the misery and frustration each non-finder experienced as he tried and failed to win the hunter-versus-hider battle of wits. The flaw is that the victim has to cooperate. We need hidden cameras.

EXACTLY!!!

Except of course the soft coordinates part...I'm a major stickler about that! Checking them a dozen or more times usually on different days. I tend to get logs like, "...it was fairly obvious where this probably was hidden since cords were right on. Great hide..."

Oh...and so far, they're all really big (for micros and smalls) :laughing:

And...as I added when I posted this locally...I'm not out to p**ss anyone off...but I'm not gonna put out easy C&D's, there are enough of them around here that I don't think I need to add more of them. I enjoy the good hunt, so I'm trying to hide the good hunt.

No, I'm the guy whose sadistic cammo gets logs like these; "Fantastically nice!" or, "I really did like the container. I tip my hat to you on that one." or, "Great job on a GREAT HIDE!! Very very well done and very clever!!! SL. TFTC! "

Isn't that why the 'Difficulty' rating goes up to 5?

Based on the lack of DNF logs, I'm starting to think I'm overestimating the hides putting them in the 2-3 range. But if I was seeing the DNFs online (especially ones that I've seen or been told about in person) I'd have an easier time justifying putting a higher D# on subsequent hides. I don't want to put out a 4 and list it as a 2...but if all I ever see are find logs I won't be able to accurately gauge how difficult they are and would tend to underestimate rather than presumptuously overestimate the Difficulty. That I think would start to make people mad. If I call it a 4, they know what they're in for...but if I call a 4 a 2 I'm not going to have happy logs whether they found it or not.

As for the hidden cameras...I put a cache where I can watch it pretty often in the hopes of seeing what's happening at GZ. The first day I watched two people spend almost the whole day there, one walking around and looking while talking on their cell phone, the other I couldn't really see but I think they mostly just sat in their car, probably waiting for the other person. That cache has never been DNFed (And is also the one that the quoted log entries came from). I've seen 2 similar caches in the area, one is rated a 2½ and the other is rated a 4 Difficulty.

October 28, 2008

soft coords, of course

Purposely giving soft coords on a cache will cause grief. What's the point to that? I want to look for and find hard caches. I don't want to look in the wrong spot for hard caches because the owner thinks that soft coords increase the difficulty.

3.9k · October 28, 2008

soft coords, of course

Purposely giving soft coords on a cache will cause grief. What's the point to that? I want to look for and find hard caches. I don't want to look in the wrong spot for hard caches because the owner thinks that soft coords increase the difficulty.

Exactly! As I have said before, I think that purposely giving incorrect or fuzzy coordinates is an insane practice, and I would never condone it.

October 28, 2008

Its interesting that nearly everyone that posted in this thread says there's no shame in the DNF log and they log all of their DNFs. That sure doesn't seem to jibe with the general populace, but the forums never really so, do they?

Two of my caching friends never log DNFs. I have no idea why they don't, but they don't. Sometimes when they find a cache they'll say "this is the 4th time I've looked for the cache" in the found log.

As a cache owner I like the DNFs because they alert me to a possible missing cache.

As a cache finder DNF logs alert me to a possible missing cache, or maybe a very difficult cache.

I believe that those who visit the forums probably post their DNFs more often than the general geocaching population. This is because you gain so much knowledge from the forums. I know that my geocaching SOP has been greatly influenced by the forums. When I started just over a year ago, I was hesitant to post a DNF since I didn't want to broadcast my failure. That all changed when I read forum threads on this subject. I now proudly post my DNFs. The prize is in the journey, not the destination.

October 28, 2008

Best post here yet Star*Hopper! ...

Thanx dood!

I'm with ya all the way. I've had an 'attitude' (if you wanta call it that) for some time now, & have mentioned more than once to caching friends -- you 'Finders' like your numbers; well, us 'Hiders' like ours too! It's just a cryin' shame the Finders aren't more giving. After all, what would they have if the Hiders didn't put out the effort.....and I'll remind that all-in-all it takes a helluva lot more effort & usually, expense, to create & place a hide than it does to find 'em! Where's th' love??

And I'm not 'Pure Evil'.....wel-l-l-l-l, there's those that might argue that, but, I mean at least NOT with all my hides. If there's one thing I do try for, it's variety. I like to provide some easy P&Gs (but don't have a single LPC!) for both the n00bs and power-run speed-freaks, as well as some Middle-Roaders and some Tuff Nuts. I think of it as providing variety - you never know what you're gonna be trying to find when you go after mine. Best thing about that strategy, it helps keep the Sherlocks (& shylocks) from gettin' a pattern on you.

'Watcher' cams. I started to mention that in my post but it was already gettin' a little long-winded. If there's one thing I would wish about the game, it's that I could afford to install one at some if not all of my hides. Then they wouldn't have to bother filing DNF's -- I'd do it for 'em!! "Film at 11" -- and THAT's entertainment!!!

~*

October 28, 2008

Must be a lot of wooden legs out there, not to feel the way I was pullin'.

9.3k · October 29, 2008

wanna race? I'm at 171

I feel like such a loser now. I only have 125 DNF's. But I do log each one, each time. DNF's are half the fun of caching.

Edit to add a caveat: My latest logging practice is kinda blog like, in that I'll tell my whole tale for the day in one log, then copy/paste that for each find/DNF/note. These tales typically run around the 4000 character limit. If I DNF, then return on the same trip and find it, as I did with this log from yesterday, I won't submit the same log as a DNF, then submit it again as a find. I figure since I describe my DNF in the log, that's good enough for me.

Edited October 29, 2008 by Clan Riffster

October 29, 2008

Just logged 4 more today. Yay.

14.3k · October 29, 2008

soft coords, of course

Purposely giving soft coords on a cache will cause grief. What's the point to that? I want to look for and find hard caches. I don't want to look in the wrong spot for hard caches because the owner thinks that soft coords increase the difficulty.

Exactly! As I have said before, I think that purposely giving incorrect or fuzzy coordinates is an insane practice, and I would never condone it.

I totally agree. It's very annoying and is a great way to end up on my user ignore list. Edited October 29, 2008 by TrailGators

3.3k · October 29, 2008

soft coords, of course

Purposely giving soft coords on a cache will cause grief. What's the point to that? I want to look for and find hard caches. I don't want to look in the wrong spot for hard caches because the owner thinks that soft coords increase the difficulty.

Exactly! As I have said before, I think that purposely giving incorrect or fuzzy coordinates is an insane practice, and I would never condone it.

I totally agree. It's very annoying and is a great way to end up on my user ignore list.

There is absolutely no reason for shame in a DNF but there is good reason for shame in intentionally "soft" coordinates. Lame, lame, lame. Poor excuse for what is usually a poor hide in a poor location. :rolleyes:

1.5k · October 29, 2008

I don't know about shame, but there is a strong element of keeping the cache history "complete." Just logged DNF #224 #226 tonight since we log ALL our cache attempts.

Edit: Update DNF count.

Edited October 30, 2008 by Ladybug Kids

6.5k · October 29, 2008

If I wasn't going out caching this weekend I might sit at home and armchair log some DNF's.

After all, it is all about the numbers, and how I want to play.

14.3k · October 29, 2008

I found a great quote that applies to this thread...

October 29, 2008

I find all of this interesting. I tend to do things a little different.

A good percentage of my caching is done at night, real early (3am) in the morning. I will download coords and look. If I don't find it in the dark (because I'm stupid, mostly) I read the description. Then I look again in the dark. If I don't find it, I log the DNF and try again in the light, with a hint. It can be quite rewarding.

I used to flip my DNF to a find once I got it, but stopped doing that.

I like logging the FTDNF, going for the FTF and getting stumped. I've had about 25 or 30 on some real good hides. Some are where the owner hadn't physically put out the cache yet. (New hiders)

As long as I enjoy it, I'll keep doing it.

I'm thinking of doing an unknown cache and making a pre-requisite 100 DNF's

as a cache owner, I will not give hints to someone who refuses to log the DNF. We have a few in Oregon. Most of the regular locals have no ego to be deflated, we were all humbled by a guy named baradam, great natural camo hides.

October 29, 2008

I find all of this interesting. I tend to do things a little different.

A good percentage of my caching is done at night, real early (3am) in the morning. I will download coords and look. If I don't find it in the dark (because I'm stupid, mostly) I read the description. Then I look again in the dark. If I don't find it, I log the DNF and try again in the light, with a hint. It can be quite rewarding.

I used to flip my DNF to a find once I got it, but stopped doing that.

I like logging the FTDNF, going for the FTF and getting stumped. I've had about 25 or 30 on some real good hides. Some are where the owner hadn't physically put out the cache yet. (New hiders)

As long as I enjoy it, I'll keep doing it.

I'm thinking of doing an unknown cache and making a pre-requisite 100 DNF's

as a cache owner, I will not give hints to someone who refuses to log the DNF. We have a few in Oregon. Most of the regular locals have no ego to be deflated, we were all humbled by a guy named baradam, great natural camo hides.

I just logged a FTDNF this morning. It popped up and I waited a while then went for it and could NOT find it. Two others have since I was there this morning but it was way too cold out there to keep trying so I gave up. I did log the DNF though. Kinda bummed but you can't win 'em all.

10.2k · October 29, 2008

wanna race? I'm at 171

I feel like such a loser now. I only have 125 DNF's. But I do log each one, each time. DNF's are half the fun of caching.

Seeing as I had to look it up yesterday for the "geocache diversity rating system" thread, I'm at 265 logged DNF's. But I only consider them 1/32 the fun of caching.

October 30, 2008

If I take the time and energy to attempt a cache, I log it whether I find it or not. I would think that if I placed a cache, the DNFs would be helpful to determine whether the cache was muggled or not. Today I logged one cache found and one DNF. That's how it goes...

October 30, 2008

If I take the time and energy to attempt a cache, I log it whether I find it or not. I would think that if I placed a cache, the DNFs would be helpful to determine whether the cache was muggled or not. Today I logged one cache found and one DNF. That's how it goes...

So did I today. I had an appointment across town so my wife suggested I check caches in the area. I'm not as stoked about urban hides as I used to be since I discovered the wonderful world of forest caches and hikes, but I want to keep my skills sharp.

I didn't feel bad at all about it. Why should I? I got out of the house, walked around on a beautiful, crisp fall day, saw a neighborhood that was new to me, and got home by lunch time. I found one and came up empty on the other. I always assume it's been muggled if I can't't find it, but someone always comes along after me a day or two later and says "Quick find. TFTC!" :yikes:

:laughing:

9.3k · October 30, 2008

someone always comes along after me a day or two later and says "Quick find. TFTC!"

I get that a lot. I attribute it to the fact that I'm dumber than a bag of hammers. :yikes:

October 31, 2008

someone always comes along after me a day or two later and says "Quick find. TFTC!"

I get that a lot. I attribute it to the fact that I'm dumber than a bag of hammers.

Another of my favorite sayings.

Here's another - "About as sharp as a bag of wet hair" :mad:

I feel really bad now about a cache I DNF-ed yesterday. I posted in the log something to the effect "Looked around and, if it's camo-ed, it's well-camo-ed!". Well, the CO, being the caring, conscientious cacher that he is, went to the site expecting to replace it after reading my log ..the very next day :mad: Well ...you guessed it. The cache is still there, in its original place, even after they built a sewage treatment plant nearby and seemed to have disturbed the area.

"Wet hair" doesn't come close to describing how dumb I feel now ...

10.1k · November 1, 2008

I like the expression: Dumber than a dead rock.

Yeah. I checked that lamp post cache after 2 DNFs. It's still there.

But the point is still: There may be no shame in a DNF, but neither is there a requirement to log one. And the reasons cited here are not convincing.

November 1, 2008

As I and others have pointed out in the past, the online log says "did not find", but the email notification says "could not find", and IIRC at least one other place says "could not". This sends a mixed signal. Those who argue here that it means only "did not", should push Groundspeak to make their terminology consistent.

Edward

November 1, 2008

I had a pretty good DNF yesterday. The day before that I had two. One of those the cache owner listed a new hint on their cache page and I was able to use that hint to turn that DNF to a found. How sweet is that?? :sad:

My DNF yesterday was awesome. A killer hike out into the woods and then after looking for a very long time I was racing out of the woods before dark rolled in. I even found a deer skull propped up on a stick. That's one cache I can't wait to go and give it another shot.

But no there's no shame in a DNF. You just couldn't find it for whatever reason, no biggy at all. But I've noticed there are less and less being logged and I don't know if it's people not wanting to admit they couldn't find or or if the cell phone hint lines are being used more and more.

November 1, 2008

There might be two big reasons that some cachers don't log DNFs.......

****"Man! I am not taking the time to tell the WORLD that I could not find this cache! I'll just put it on my "watch" list and see if some other "rube" can't find it also. If I see a "smilie" pop up later, then I "did good" by not spilling my guts about how MYOPIC I am in the finding department!"

That was #1

Now, let's press on to a possible #2......

****"Man! I am not taking the time to tell the WORLD that I could not find a cache that is PROBABLY NOT THERE ANYWAY!! Besides, the guy didn't leave a Big Pile Of Sticks as a marker! The NERVE! The AUDACITY! I will just put this on my watch list and see if some "rube" spills his guts about not finding the cache. Then when a smiley face pops up a few days later, I will laugh myself silly at that RUBE and count my blessings that I did not show the world what a MYOPIC dork I am!"

The above may or MAY NOT be valid reasons for not posting DNFs......... :sad:

November 1, 2008

soft coords, of course

Purposely giving soft coords on a cache will cause grief. What's the point to that? I want to look for and find hard caches. I don't want to look in the wrong spot for hard caches because the owner thinks that soft coords increase the difficulty.

Exactly! As I have said before, I think that purposely giving incorrect or fuzzy coordinates is an insane practice, and I would never condone it.

I know of one cacher who has been known to give soft coords and then get extremely huffy if anyone says anything about it. On one cache, the coordinates put one squarely in the middle of a 4-lane, 4-way intersection. Despite numerous complaints, she insists that the problem is with your GPSr, not hers. Complain too much about her terrible coordinates, and she'll delete your find logs on her other caches...

On Topic: I, personally, log the majority of my DNF's. I can remember one particular cache that I logged at least 3 DNF's on. All told, 159 DNF's with 1442 finds. How odd, I have almost as many DNF's as I have FTF's!

Edited November 1, 2008 by E = Mc2

November 1, 2008

Cool cachers log their DNFs.

November 1, 2008

I log my DNF's & I am proud of them

The only shame in a DNF is the shame on me for having what my friend calls as an 'OLD MOMENT'. There has been a DNF that when I did find it I didnt feel dumb that I didnt find it the 1st or 2nd time I looked.

But if I cant laugh at my self how can I justify laughing at someone else?

2.7k · November 2, 2008

I log my DNFs because I find them useful later on when I go back to the area again. If a cache isn't on DNF list I might think I have never searched for that cache before. Also a good DNF log reminds me of what I did to look for the cache last time and/or the situation that caused the DNF.

November 3, 2008

One very common occurence around here is not logging dnf's on brand new caches... Personally I love being the first to dnf and logging so.

Well, then I don't feel so bad.

I have been the FTDNF on three caches in the past week. All of them were fairly new, but had at least 20 finds on them already. One had like 35 finds. I looked and looked but DNF, so I posted as such. I also put the caches on my watch list and was oh so heartened to read subsequent posts like "a quick easy find!" and "great P&G." One even said something like "this had to be a record for us in terms of how quick we found it!"

So no, these caches aren't lost. I'm just being dumb/blind! I know I'm fairly new at this, so I expect a few (or a lot, depending on the day!) DNFs. I will look again, once I get over the "shame" of logging a DNF!

Team MamaLlama

November 3, 2008

edit to delete double entry

Edited November 3, 2008 by Team MamaLlama

November 9, 2008

A note from a newbie: It took me 2 trips to 3 different caches before I made my first find. I didn’t post DNF’s for those. I figured that as they were literally my first attempts, I was no better than a muggle. When I did find them on my second attempts, I posted the finds and that it took me 2 attempts. I’m at only 4 finds now (and climbing), but I don’t feel that I should post any DNF’s until I’ve made 10 to 15 finds. By then I should have some idea about what I’m doing. After that, I see no shame in a DNF. If the day comes where I decide to leave a few caches of my own, I hope other’s will post DNF’s to let me know if I hid them well enough, or too well.

November 9, 2008

A note from a newbie: It took me 2 trips to 3 different caches before I made my first find. I didn’t post DNF’s for those. I figured that as they were literally my first attempts, I was no better than a muggle. When I did find them on my second attempts, I posted the finds and that it took me 2 attempts. I’m at only 4 finds now (and climbing), but I don’t feel that I should post any DNF’s until I’ve made 10 to 15 finds. By then I should have some idea about what I’m doing. After that, I see no shame in a DNF. If the day comes where I decide to leave a few caches of my own, I hope other’s will post DNF’s to let me know if I hid them well enough, or too well.

Well, you've added yet another new one - I'll give you that.

Hmmm....lessee now. Then maybe I feel that I shouldn't post any DNF's until I've made .... ohhhh.....1000 to maybe 1500 finds! By then I should have some idea about what I'm doing.

But y'know.....we can really work this thang! Maybe I should decide that I'll start filing DNFs when I reach a count one higher than what I've found, & just make that permanent. Why, that way I won't ever have a DNF!! And no shame!!

My, my, my. Puzzles aren't puzzles any more; 'First' don't mean "the incremental position greater than zero and immediately preceding the second position". Instead, it could mean any one of any number on a team or coincidental bystanders in the vicinity - or all of 'em!! And now "did not" means "until I'm ready for it to happen". Poor ol' cache hiders don't know whether to blink or go blind.

What's this world comin' to?!? "I didn't rob that bank, your honor! I haven't done 5 of 'em yet....so I'm innocent just by not knowin' what I was doing!!"

Ye-e-e-aah...at'll work.

~*

PS: No problem d00d....jus' funnin' on ya some. Play yo' game -- they ain't no rules.

November 9, 2008

A note from a newbie: It took me 2 trips to 3 different caches before I made my first find. I didn’t post DNF’s for those. I figured that as they were literally my first attempts, I was no better than a muggle. When I did find them on my second attempts, I posted the finds and that it took me 2 attempts. I’m at only 4 finds now (and climbing), but I don’t feel that I should post any DNF’s until I’ve made 10 to 15 finds. By then I should have some idea about what I’m doing. After that, I see no shame in a DNF. If the day comes where I decide to leave a few caches of my own, I hope other’s will post DNF’s to let me know if I hid them well enough, or too well.

Personally, I think your approach is quite defensible, especially if you are learning to cache on your own. Sometimes the forums can be tougher than any cache! Hope you continue to enjoy the caching experience and meet many friendly cachers along the way.

Bean

November 10, 2008

Thanks for the discussion. newbie here with a first DNF today. My inclination was to go back and try again until I could successfully log it but I'll put in the DNF now.

November 10, 2008

A note from a newbie: It took me 2 trips to 3 different caches before I made my first find. I didn’t post DNF’s for those. I figured that as they were literally my first attempts, I was no better than a muggle. When I did find them on my second attempts, I posted the finds and that it took me 2 attempts. I’m at only 4 finds now (and climbing), but I don’t feel that I should post any DNF’s until I’ve made 10 to 15 finds. By then I should have some idea about what I’m doing. After that, I see no shame in a DNF. If the day comes where I decide to leave a few caches of my own, I hope other’s will post DNF’s to let me know if I hid them well enough, or too well.

Personally, I think your approach is quite defensible, especially if you are learning to cache on your own. Sometimes the forums can be tougher than any cache! Hope you continue to enjoy the caching experience and meet many friendly cachers along the way.

Bean

2 DNFs on different caches before our first find. Logged them both.

November 10, 2008

Our first day of caching we found one and didn't find one. We logged both.

Some of our DNFs have been wonderful. A great place to be that we would not have experienced if not searching for a chache.

I think it's good info for the cache owner.

Several of our DNFs have turned out to be ... the darn cache wasn't there. And the owner might not have realized that w/o a DNF or two.

The search, for us, has always been worth the effort whether or not we found the cache.

November 10, 2008

Well...I've already said I log mine, but tonight I experienced one of the little benefits of logging DNFs that I thought I'd share.

I got an email a few hours ago from the CO of one of my recent DNFs.

Here's my DNF log I left:

DRAT!Wasn't prepared to walk in the water...thought I could find it by employing my rock climbing skills so I climbed all over the bridge pillar. Had no luck with that. Did a lot of reaching over the edge of the bridge and feeling around underneath (Holy smokes what a lot of rusted steel!) but came up empty.

Will return with a pair of waders, and a bigger flashlight...AFTER I go get a tetanus shot!

TFTH!

The location was beautiful, the hunt was fun and I arrived unprepared (Read the cache page when we got there).

I think we found 5 caches that day but none was as much fun to look for as the one we didn't find.

so, tonight I got this email from the CO:

Hey Simba Jamey -
Just a quick (sad) note to tell you that the StonyBrookside cache has been disabled temporarily. You can check the log but it is likely that this was sealed from any possible retrieval during your visit. We will be back to adjust this soon.

Peace,

Jeff

So...not only do my geosenses feel slightly vindicated (I said to my caching partner that day when we first got there, "I bet it's under one of those brand new pieces of plywood nailed to the bridge deck."), but a couple of posted DNFs prompted the CO to check the cache and find out that the access location had been sealed up so he could disable it before anyone else went after an unreachable cache (not to mention saving me from spending another hour or two there the next time I'm in that neighborhood ).

So...I will continue posting DNFs when I look and come up empty.

November 12, 2008

.

A couple of days ago, I logged two DNF's after just one trip to the same multi cache.

Could not find stage four but I knew the owner and gave him a call, and eventually found it after he told me where it was. Had I not had his number I would have left without the find so that's a DNF in my book.

Then I went off to the next stage and, again, failure. That's the second DNF. Truthfully, my heart was not into it at this point and I could never get the unit under 45 feet, but that is still a DNF.

A few days later a guy logs a find and indicates he has attempted the cache at least three times, including once with someone else but was unable to find the tough stage four. No DNF's were posted by either.

I believe there have been one or two other visitors who also failed at the same stage but did not post a DNF.

Sometimes there is shame in a DNF when we miss something that is not real tough.

Always there is shame when you do not find it, and don't fess up with a DNF log.

.

November 12, 2008

I think that logging a DNF seems shameful to newer players,

who don't get that even the veteran players can sometimes miss a ammo can in a tree stump.

The more I play, the more I find DNF's very very useful, as a hunter and a cacher owner.

7.7k · November 12, 2008

I think that logging a DNF seems shameful to newer players, who don't get that even the veteran players can sometimes miss a ammo can in a tree stump. The more I play, the more I find DNF's very very useful, as a hunter and a cacher owner.

As a newer player, I do not log my DNF if I feel that I have not given it sufficient effort in the search, because I do not want to mislead other finders and / or skew the statistics. As I said, I'm new to the game, just giving my reasons, not saying they are right. I'm still trying to get a good grasp of geocaching etiquette and hoping to learn from this thread (and others).

November 12, 2008

I think that logging a DNF seems shameful to newer players, who don't get that even the veteran players can sometimes miss a ammo can in a tree stump. The more I play, the more I find DNF's very very useful, as a hunter and a cacher owner.

As a newer player, I do not log my DNF if I feel that I have not given it sufficient effort in the search, because I do not want to mislead other finders and / or skew the statistics. As I said, I'm new to the game, just giving my reasons, not saying they are right. I'm still trying to get a good grasp of geocaching etiquette and hoping to learn from this thread (and others).

You're on to something there, but don't let it stop you from posting DNF's. I will log one if I have made it to ground zero (or as close as I can get), and actually searched for the cache. I try to make the DNF log itself explain the situation. For example, "Got to GZ and looked at the obvious spots before it got dark", and "Spent an hour looking everywhere, is it still here?" both say I didn't find it, but convey two very different messages.

Edited November 12, 2008 by doingitoldschool

November 13, 2008

I will log a DNF just so the owner can keep track of what is going on sooner. I really hate getting messages from owners who are physically watching a cache about me not posting a DNF when I stopped to try and hubby decided he didn't have time for it and we left before having a real try at it. He recognized me and sent me a note about not posting a DNF.

As for soft cords, If I consistently find a particular cacher puts out soft cords they are deleted form my search list. I have a friend who put a cache out and her GPS was going bad and she didn't know it yet. A cacher posted that they were 40 feet off. She got a new GPS and fixed the cords, but kept getting fixes from every other person to find the cache. One put in a correction that amounted to 6 feet. She finally just archived it since it seemed to be cursed with the need to be corrected at every find.

November 14, 2008

I do not always log a DNF because I don't want to turn off the next finder looking at the logs before going. I will, if there is a story to be told or if I think I really looked good and suspect it isn't there anymore. If I didn't have time or wasn't that interested in an involved look - I will not log DNF. I just come back later or forget the cache all together. Some are so horribly uninteresting - I really don't care if I log a 'Found It'!

Some caches are hard and the logs need to reflect that not everyone is finding it and that is a good thing cause it shows this is a hunting game and some of us want a good hunt. If I can't do it cause it wet or something stops me from trying I usually do not log a DNF. You should never be ashamed of DNF if you gave it a good try and don't ever assume you won't find it on the next try. A fresh mind usually does the trick.

22k · November 14, 2008

I do not always log a DNF because I don't want to turn off the next finder looking at the logs before going. I will, if there is a story to be told or if I think I really looked good and suspect it isn't there anymore. If I didn't have time or wasn't that interested in an involved look - I will not log DNF. I just come back later or forget the cache all together. Some are so horribly uninteresting - I really don't care if I log a 'Found It'!

Some caches are hard and the logs need to reflect that not everyone is finding it and that is a good thing cause it shows this is a hunting game and some of us want a good hunt. If I can't do it cause it wet or something stops me from trying I usually do not log a DNF. You should never be ashamed of DNF if you gave it a good try and don't ever assume you won't find it on the next try. A fresh mind usually does the trick.

There is also no shame in logging a Found It. Of course you may be teased by your cache buddies for leading the pack in LPCs finds.

Is there shame in a DNF?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment