Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
ArtMan

'Not found' or 'Note' - I can't decide

Recommended Posts

I've lately been logging some benchmarks that I have been unable to find with a Note, rather than a 'Not Found' entry. I reserve this for cases in which I think the mark is still there, but for whatever reason I was unable to find it. Possibly it's because the mark is on private property, or maybe it's a subsurface mark, or perhaps I just need some coffee. I have been reserving 'Not found' for cases in which I believe the mark is no longer there. I use 'Destroyed' in very few cases when I have positive knowledge that the mark is gone, e.g. the now-retired World Trade Center TV mast.

 

My thinking is that a 'Not Found' report will dissuade the next Benchmarker, and if I think the mark is still there, I don't want to discourage the next searcher, who may well find it. (And it's happened that way, for example at HV1661.)

 

Am I being too conservative?

Share this post


Link to post

i think logging a "not found" is correct. you looked for it, and didn't find it. i have several that i logged "not found" and then described them as likely being therelike this one. if your description indicates that the mark may still be there, then the next hunter may look more thoroughly, like Black DOg Trackers did with HV1661.

Share this post


Link to post

This is a good topic.

 

Looking at my 'Note's, I find that I've been using them somewhat differently.

 

Most of my Notes are where there was a no-trespassing, permission issue, fence, or some such searching prevention. I showed up on the scene, but then found that I could not look for the disk. I figure if I can't look, a Not-Found is not really a good characterization of what happened.

 

In my review of my Notes today, I also discovered that for a couple of them I probably should've used Destroyed instead, using the comparitively lax Geocaching definition of Destroyed. I will consider changing these. (I've never even used Destroyed, I think.)

 

I use Not-Found whenever I don't find a marker that I actually did look for, whether I think the probability of it actually being there is 5% or 50%.

 

In a more direct answer to ArtMan's question; too conservative? Not really; just different.

 

I guess in my case, my Notes would be more likely to dissuade a subsequent benchmarker, and my Not-Founds are good hunting grounds as in this case!

Share this post


Link to post

I agree, this is an excellent topic; more questions like this would make the forum much more interesting and useful.

 

quote:
Originally posted by sixthings:

i think logging a "not found" is correct. you looked for it, and didn't find it.


 

That's perfect for geocaches, but I think benchmarks are a little different. It's a tough call, but I tend to side with ArtMan on this one. In fact, what he described is almost exactly the way I've started to interpret the meaning of "note" and "not found" for benchmarks. I consider a note (in most cases) to be more of a "find in progress." That is, I have not searched to my satisfaction and will most likely be returning, after I've done some more research, or when I have more time, or when I've contacted the property owner or whatever the situation involves. The next benchmark hunter to come along may see the situation differently and find it right away. With caches, anytime you give a genuine effort and don't find the cache, it's wise to log "not found" not only as a matter of honor and as a record of the experience, but also to alert the owner that something might have gone wrong with the cache. With a benchmark, there's really no reason to alert anyone to the fact that you looked around for a little while and didn't find anything. To my mind, that's only relevant when you've looked around a great deal and/or have solid evidence to suspect that the mark is missing or permanently inaccessible. When I log a "not found" on a benchmark, for me that means that I don't see a reason to return.

 

Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by Zhanna:

...With a benchmark, there's really no reason to alert anyone to the fact that you looked around for a little while and didn't find anything. To my mind, that's only relevant when you've looked around a great deal and/or have solid evidence to suspect that the mark is missing or permanently inaccessible. When I log a "not found" on a benchmark, for me that means that I don't see a reason to return.

 

Zhanna


 

I had not really given a lot of thought to the "note" versus "not found issue". I like Zhanna's approach. I think for those marks that I have done a exhaustive search and will not be back I will log it as a not found. If I have not given up I think I will use a note.

 

If for instance I ran out of time and did not locate the mark but did identify one or more relevant landmarks I will note that in the log.

 

Sometimes I suspect that pride or competitiveness have me keeping some of the ongoing searches to myself. But perhaps I should try to think that sharing and cooperating can be just as fun if it allows us to find some of those more elusive marks.

Share this post


Link to post

I see accounts from several people about going back two or more times to the same benchmark location to look for it again, and using the Note feature. I'd have to say I don't do that. Except for 2 PIDs (HV9682, AA2666), I look for an hour or more until I give up and then I never go back. So, I guess I have no real incentive to use the Note feature for that kind of case.

 

I've tried to examine the logic of evaluating a Not-Found case. Whether you think it's actually extremely likely to be there, or are quite sure it's not, someone else could come along and find it, making your evaluation worthless. So, in either case, I'm not sure it's worth coding differently to 'help' the next person.

 

I looked and found that Zhanna and I have been using the Note feature in one similar way - cases of an indecision about whether to code the PID as Note or Destroyed. So, there's another quandry. icon_smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by Black Dog Trackers:

So, in either case, I'm not sure it's worth coding differently to 'help' the next person.


 

Which is why I emphasize that my strategy is really only meant to help me. I have no idea what anyone else will encounter when they get there — even a "find" really only applies to the date and time the mark was found. (Who knows: maybe someone came along and destroyed it five minutes after I left.) I wouldn't suggest that just because I logged a mark as a "not found," others shouldn't try for it.

 

quote:
I looked and found that Zhanna and I have been using the Note feature in one similar way - cases of an indecision about whether to code the PID as Note or Destroyed. So, there's another quandry. icon_smile.gif

 

It would help if we had a set of standards to cover most cases that will arise; but there's also no real need to make the system more complex than it already is. Maybe the best thing to do for now is for each person to be consistent, whichever method they choose. (Of course, this only applies to these gray areas!)

 

Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

I log benchmarks the same way as I log caches: If I look for it, and I don't find it, I log a "not found." I also include in my log the details of the search.

 

web-lingbutton.gif ntga_button.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I have only used the note for cases where I know the marker exists, but I couldn't prove it. In one case the property owner didn't want me to dig up his sod. In the other the marker was covered by a large vinyl X for an arial photo.

 

If I gave it my best effort and didn't find it, I own up to it and mark it accordingly.

 

Personally, I am not dissuaded by someone else's "not found". I tend to view it as a challenge.

 

-- Its from aliens. I seen um. --

Share this post


Link to post

I love to go after the "not found" ones, even more so when I do ACTUALLY find them. Kind of a "I bet I can find it even though he can't" challenge.

Share this post


Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by TEAM 360:

I love to go after the "not found" ones, even more so when I do ACTUALLY find them. Kind of a "I bet I can find it even though he can't" challenge.


 

Another challenge is to try for the "skull" benchmarks (the ones that show up when you click "See all benchmarks for this query"). So far I've only searched for one of them; I had a pretty good idea it would still be there, and it was: LY1365. Feels great to find one the professionals missed! (Although I suspect that in some cases, they didn't even look.)

 

Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

quote:
Another challenge is to try for the "skull" benchmarks (the ones that show up when you click "See all benchmarks for this query"). So far I've only searched for one of them; I had a pretty good idea it would still be there, and it was: http://www.geocaching.com/mark/details.asp?PID=LY1365. Feels great to find one the professionals missed! (Although I suspect that in some cases, they didn't even look.)

 

Zhanna


 

Yep, I am willing to bet the last guy who got sent out to recover some of the desert marks around here really didn't feel like wandering around in 110-degree heat looking for a little metal disc, which also makes me wonder: Who's the idiot that came out here and thought "Gee, 110 degrees, no air, no deodorant..Hey! Let's live here!".

Share this post


Link to post

110-degree heat??? Compared to what we've been dealing with here in the Northeast for the past few months, that actually sounds rather inviting!

 

quote:
Originally posted by TEAM 360:

... which also makes me wonder: Who's the idiot that came out here and thought "Gee, 110 degrees, no air, no deodorant..Hey! Let's live here!".


 

Funny, I often find myself wondering something similar about this place. (Minus the heat, of course.) icon_cool.gif

 

Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

I concur with Black Dog Tracker's first post, above, regarding the use of NOTE. I've started using NOTE in two cases: first, where the mark is inaccessible - as in JU2573 where the causeway on which a mark is mounted is condemned and gated closed -, and, second, where there is something interesting about a mark that is very probably but not demonstrably DESTROYED - as in JU0655 where in 1992 the USGS reported a no-find for a 1930 mark on a building that had been razed and replaced in 1991. I have a long list of marks that I should have posted as NOTE by now, and I'll post 'em when I catch up on my finds and no-finds.

Share this post


Link to post

What's the definition of "destroyed"? What if its location indicates that if it still exists, it's buried under concrete?

 

[This message was edited by xargs on June 29, 2003 at 12:36 AM.]

Share this post


Link to post

xargs -

 

My opinion - on the Geocaching site, call it destroyed.

 

However, make sure you've got the location correct. If what you seek is has Scaled coordinates, you must rely on the verbal location description instead, as you may already know.

Share this post


Link to post

I had a busy benchmarking weekend and logged 10 sites. Based on this thread I used note for 4 of them: AK6020, AK7476, AK5965 & AK5993. What does the group think?

In the case of AK5993 the use of note is obvious, I just looked quickly around and want to return. In the case of AK5965 maybe I should have said not found, or even destroyed because the beacon tower is gone. But I found 3 of the 4 footings and others may want to go and 'find' them also.

Share this post


Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by Craig McCartney:

I had a busy benchmarking weekend and logged 10 sites. Based on this thread I used note for 4 of them: AK6020, AK7476, AK5965 & AK5993. What does the group think?


 

Here's my opinion:

 

AK6020

 

I’d call it destroyed here, and “not found” (with an explanation) on NGS.

 

AK7476

 

Not found here, with the explanation of why I think it’s probably there. I wouldn’t report anything to NGS.

 

AK5965

 

The beacon is the benchmark. It’s destroyed. I’d report it that way here, and “not found” with explanation to NGS.

 

AK5993

 

Note is good. You haven’t found it yet, but you tell us what your next step is.

 

(All just my opinion. Others will disagree.)

Share this post


Link to post

Zhanna, I read your statement that the unstamped disk was 0.25 miles off the coordinates. The coordinates are scaled +/- 180 meters = +/- 0.22 miles. Your mileage may vary.If you want, you can report your consumer grade coordinates and NGS will make note of them. This will help others down the road, however a vertical disk with not stamping or coordinates is pretty meaningless in todays world.

Share this post


Link to post

quote:
Originally posted by wolf452:

The coordinates are scaled +/- 180 meters = +/- 0.22 miles.


 

How do you figure this? As I calculate it, 180 meters is only about 0.11 miles.

 

quote:
This will help others down the road, however a vertical disk with not stamping or coordinates is pretty meaningless in todays world.

 

Thanks; that is good to know. Are there applications where it would still be useful?

 

Zhanna

Share this post


Link to post

Zhanna

Stamping and coordinates are not relevant for a true benchmark such as the one you found on the bridge abutment. The elevation or altitude is the one aspect of such a marker that has significance. As long as its still solid, and its setting remains unmoved, its as good as ever. So your find is as valuable today as the day it was set. I especially appreciate your dedication to finding all the oldest ones in your area, well done.

Share this post


Link to post
quote:
I consider a note (in most cases) to be more of a "find in progress." That is, I have not searched to my satisfaction and will most likely be returning, after I've done some more research, or when I have more time, or when I've contacted the property owner or whatever the situation involves. With caches, anytime you give a genuine effort and don't find the cache, it's wise to log "not found" to alert the owner that something might have gone wrong with the cache. With a benchmark, there's really no reason to alert anyone to the fact that you looked around for a little while and didn't find anything.
I don't log until I try about 3 times and still can't find it.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

×