Etiquette - How many times visit before DNF - Did Not Find

[+rolfdenver]

I'm wondering whether there's established etiquette discouraging postings of DNFs until you've made more than one visit to a cache location.

 

I'm relatively new to caching (just reached 100 finds) and especially in the beginning I was posting DNFs after every visit, if I couldn't find a cache after a good 15-30 minutes hunting. But since then I've seen other posts where people have obviously visited a location multiple times, sometimes with companions, before they've found the cache yet they haven't posted any DNFs in the meantime.

 

Have I been posting DNFs too quickly? Should I only post a DNF if I'm almost certain the cache is missing - rather than to indicate to others that the cache is a hard bugger to find (at least for me)?

[+''mykez'']

Personally I think it is right that you post up a DNF each time you visit, this way you can log how many times you have been there, and the CO can see how long it took you to find it, must be quite nice to know that someone keeps visiting and doesn't give up?

 

I'm new to this my self.

[+vincenzosi]

I'm wondering whether there's established etiquette discouraging postings of DNFs until you've made more than one visit to a cache location.

 

I'm relatively new to caching (just reached 100 finds) and especially in the beginning I was posting DNFs after every visit, if I couldn't find a cache after a good 15-30 minutes hunting. But since then I've seen other posts where people have obviously visited a location multiple times, sometimes with companions, before they've found the cache yet they haven't posted any DNFs in the meantime.

 

Have I been posting DNFs too quickly? Should I only post a DNF if I'm almost certain the cache is missing - rather than to indicate to others that the cache is a hard bugger to find (at least for me)?

DNF's are not the end of the world. On my second week of caching, I logged a few and have just gotten around to doing "cleanup," and most of them are disappearing off my list. I would say don't be ashamed, you're just saying you didn't find it (which you didn't). The area gets trickier when you start pointing out NM (needs maintenance) or NA (needs archiving), but a DNF simply means you didn't find it, which is perfectly acceptable. If you think you've put in a good effort to make the find and didn't come up with it, a DNF is appropriate.

[+Panther&Pine]

I log a DNF every time I get to GZ (to me that means getting within say 50 feet of a cache). If I run into muggles and don't get that close I usually log a note- but I generally dont' let a few muggles stop me from hunting.

Everyone has their own definition of a DNF.

[+Lil Devil]

I log each and every DNF, even multiple ones on the same cache. There is one cache page out there somewhere (can't remember which now) that has 5 DNF logs by me over a few weeks followed by one very happy Found log.

 

I always indicate the conditions in my DNF log. If I only searched for a minute before being muggled out, I'll mention that. That way the cache owner doesn't have to run out to check on a cache that I didn't have time to properly search for.

[+dfx]

Some people don't post DNFs at all.

[+briansnat]

I'm wondering whether there's established etiquette discouraging postings of DNFs until you've made more than one visit to a cache location.

 

I log a DNF for the first visit and all subsequent visits. The only exception is if there are multiple visits on the same day. I'll combine them in one log.

 

Have I been posting DNFs too quickly? Should I only post a DNF if I'm almost certain the cache is missing - rather than to indicate to others that the cache is a hard bugger to find (at least for me)?

 

A DNF only means that you didn't find the cache. The reason is irrelevant. Besides it's difficult to say for certain that the cache is missing unless you are with someone who already found it. If I had a dollar for every person who was certain one of my caches was missing and I went there and found it right where I hid it, I could take the wife out for a very nice dinner.

Edited June 20, 2011 by briansnat

[+steben6]

As a cache owner, I would like to see DNFs logged, just in case there is something wrong with our caches. It helps if you log the reason for the DNF (i.e., too many muggles, looks like it was missing, not enough time, whatever). That helps me decide if I really need to go check on the cache. There is absolutely no shame in logging a DNF. There is no penalty We log every DNF, even if it means more than one DNF log on the same cache if we visited more than once.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

You're doing it right....log a DNF.

Many I've looked for lately had only smiley logs.....problem was the finders had used PAF while still others didn't post a DNF. If PAF had not been used and all DNF's logged the last 5 or so logs on these would have been frownies and would have been a better indication of how hard they were to find.

[knowschad]

Some people don't post DNFs at all.

Yeah, I know a couple of those. Typically they are cachers that don't have any of their own hides, so they don't fully appreciate the importance of DNFs to cache owners.

 

And then, there are those that don't post any Finds at all, either...

[+Lieblweb]

Depends.

When we first started, we were reluctant to log a lot of DNF's simply because of our newbiness.

 

But now? We log all that we can't find as DNF's. We like seeing and sorting our DNF's for later so we can try them again.

 

I wish the GeoApp would show DNF's like it does for smilies.

[+Don_J]

I log each and every DNF, even multiple ones on the same cache. There is one cache page out there somewhere (can't remember which now) that has 5 DNF logs by me over a few weeks followed by one very happy Found log.

 

I always indicate the conditions in my DNF log. If I only searched for a minute before being muggled out, I'll mention that. That way the cache owner doesn't have to run out to check on a cache that I didn't have time to properly search for.

 

If I wasn't able to properly look, no parking, etc, I generally do not post a DNF. If I did look and did not find it, I have no problem posting a DNF log. 344 so far.

[+Flintstone5611]

We log DNFs (all the time lately, lol). I know that at first we had a bit of a pride issue, perceiving that it might be viewed as failure. A more experience cacher helped me realize the value of logging them and now it is our practice to log our failires.

[Clan Riffster]

I've seen other posts where people have obviously visited a location multiple times, sometimes with companions, before they've found the cache yet they haven't posted any DNFs in the meantime.

Hi rolfdenver, welcome to the madness, and congratulations on reaching 100!

Now back to your question...

I see this a lot as well. I spend a lot of time talking with other cachers, trying to understand why they do the things they do, and this is a topic that comes up a lot. The most common answer I get from folks who do this a lot is they feel that a DNF is a mark of failure. Personally, I am very proud of my DNFs, and post every single one, even if I have multiple DNFs on a cache. I feel the online logs are as much a part of the history of a cache as the paper ones, and I feel that anything I do at a cache should be documented, if for no other reason than to let the owner know their cache isn't being forgotten.

 

I've developed a loose protocol for cache hunting and logging that works something like this:

 

If I hunt a cache, locate it and sign the log, I claim it as a find.

If I hunt a cache, locate it and can't sign, (wet log, rusted shut, too high up a tree, etc), it gets a note.

If I engage in an actual hunt at ground zero and come up empty handed, it gets a DNF.

If I wave off the hunt due to muggles at ground zero, a closed trail system, etc, it gets a note.

 

Edit to add: I have so many DNFs I actually joined a Facebook group geared toward celebrating such things, called ISAG, (I Suck At Geocaching)

Edited June 20, 2011 by Clan Riffster

[+A & J Tooling]

I've been to one cache 3 times now with a dnf each time. The reason? High water. Still, I didn't find it so it's a dnf. I can see it but I can't sign it.

[+JoLTeam]

I've been to one cache 3 times now with a dnf each time. The reason? High water. Still, I didn't find it so it's a dnf. I can see it but I can't sign it.

 

For this kind of situations there should be a "DidNotSearch" or "CouldNotSearch" log type.

[+GeoGeeBee]

I've been to one cache 3 times now with a dnf each time. The reason? High water. Still, I didn't find it so it's a dnf. I can see it but I can't sign it.

 

For this kind of situations there should be a "DidNotSearch" or "CouldNotSearch" log type.

Why? "Did Not Find" seems to adequately describe Not Finding the cache. You can write several hundred words on why you didn't find it, if you want.

[+A & J Tooling]

If I chicken out because of too many muggles, it's a dnf. A dnf seems pretty straight forward to me. Did I find the cache and sign the log? Nope. DNF.

Did I get to the GZ and get my leg chewed off by an angry bear? DNF.

Tornado? DNF.

Didn't put the car in park and it rolled off a cliff and I forgot about caching for the moment? DNF.

 

But hey, everyone plays by their own rules. If they want to cheat, who am I to call them on it?

[+JoLTeam]

I've been to one cache 3 times now with a dnf each time. The reason? High water. Still, I didn't find it so it's a dnf. I can see it but I can't sign it.

 

For this kind of situations there should be a "DidNotSearch" or "CouldNotSearch" log type.

Why? "Did Not Find" seems to adequately describe Not Finding the cache. You can write several hundred words on why you didn't find it, if you want.

 

Because to me Didn't Find means "Searched and yet Couldn't Find". If I didn't search, I don't post a DNF. In that case I post a note.

[MisterEFQ]

If I chicken out because of too many muggles, it's a dnf. A dnf seems pretty straight forward to me. Did I find the cache and sign the log? Nope. DNF.

Did I get to the GZ and get my leg chewed off by an angry bear? DNF.

Tornado? DNF.

Didn't put the car in park and it rolled off a cliff and I forgot about caching for the moment? DNF.

 

But hey, everyone plays by their own rules. If they want to cheat, who am I to call them on it?

 

Cheating? Pffft.

[+Doctroid]

Edit to add: I have so many DNFs I actually joined a Facebook group geared toward celebrating such things, called ISAG, (I Suck At Geocaching)

 

As did I, now that I know about it! I've only logged 34 DNFs so far but hope to increase that number dramatically in the future.

[+A & J Tooling]

If I chicken out because of too many muggles, it's a dnf. A dnf seems pretty straight forward to me. Did I find the cache and sign the log? Nope. DNF.

Did I get to the GZ and get my leg chewed off by an angry bear? DNF.

Tornado? DNF.

Didn't put the car in park and it rolled off a cliff and I forgot about caching for the moment? DNF.

 

But hey, everyone plays by their own rules. If they want to cheat, who am I to call them on it?

 

Cheating? Pffft.

That's why we play by our own rules.

[+the4dirtydogs]

We post all of our DNF's. All that means is you have to come back and find the cache. I don't know why cachers don't post theirs but I bet it has something to do with what CR said about it being a failure. DNFs provide info to the CO that maybe there might be a problem with the cache. So keep on posting them with each visit and maybe you can earn as many as we have. I think we're in the 400s. I think I might have to join the ISAG group.

[+ventura_kids]

If we search for a geocache, yet don't find it, and we feel it is actually there....then we log a DNF.

If we only spend a minute searching, yet don't find it....it's a DNF, and we log it(That's about our average search time anyways).

If we feel the geocache may not be there, yet we don't find it....we log a DNF.

If we didn't really get to search....for any reason....then we log a note, and explain that we didn't really get to search because of....whatever it was.

If we are returning for the 5th time to try, try again....and we DNF it, we log another DNF. We log a DNF for each legitimate try.

 

If you are doing the same for my hides....thanks. It helps me to know what is going on at my hides.

[+Jennifer&Dean]

When in doubt, if you were there to look for a cache and couldn't find it, put a DNF.

IF you found it but could not sign it, then either a DNF or a note, depending on circumstances.

 

This way the owner knows someone went out looking and may have had an issue.

 

Saturday we got to a cache and high water kept us from attempting it. We could see it but could not see how deep the water was between us and it as it was muddy and fast. We could have waded, but didn't want to chance ending up in over out heads literally and figuratively. So we logged a DNF and mentioned that the cache looked fine but the water was too high to attempt it.

 

On Sunday we ran into the cache owner at a movie and he thanked us for the DNF as he had been wondering about high water at that particular location. He told us we chose wisely as from our description, the water would have been about 3-4 feet deep at the cache, with a deep spot between the shore and the cache to navigate.

 

Then he teased us about not finding his other cache nearby... no water there... We didn't have it on our to-do as it was a .5 mile scramble straight up a mountain with no trail and few handholds. Not something we planned on trying so we didn't log a note.

 

So, if you try to do it and can't, post something... it makes for good conversations when you run into the owner.

Jen

Edited June 20, 2011 by Jennifer&Dean

[+Don_J]

If I chicken out because of too many muggles, it's a dnf. A dnf seems pretty straight forward to me. Did I find the cache and sign the log? Nope. DNF.

Did I get to the GZ and get my leg chewed off by an angry bear? DNF.

Tornado? DNF.

Didn't put the car in park and it rolled off a cliff and I forgot about caching for the moment? DNF.

 

But hey, everyone plays by their own rules. If they want to cheat, who am I to call them on it?

 

There is a cache hidden behind the display sheds at a local Home Depot. I pulled into the parking lot last Saturday and kept on going because It was so busy, I couldn't even maneuver my car into that area of the parking lot. I did not post a DNF. I guess in your view, I am a cheater. You really do have a strange perspective on things.

[+TerraViators]

For me, any single visit to GZ merits a log. I DNG every visit I don't find. I have 463 DNF's and a coin I visit to each DNF. I once DNF'd a cache 3 times in a single afternoon.

[Clan Riffster]

Because to me Didn't Find means "Searched and yet Couldn't Find".

If I didn't search, I don't post a DNF.

In that case I post a note.

Yeah, that's how I view it as well. In my eyes, the act of searching is kinda implicit with finding, and vice versa. I feel that I have to actually search for a cache in order to DNF it. On many occasions, I've headed toward a cache and decided not to stop for one reason or another. I still feel the need to post something, as I did fire up the Garmin and get close, but I choose to use the Note option in those cases rather than the DNF option. I can't say either way is wrong, it's just my preference.

[AZcachemeister]

Please log your DNFs for every visit.

It could be the cache is missing (again).

It could be the difficulty is underrated (and the owner needs to know).

[+Harry Dolphin]

Hey! I'm up to 353 DNFs! About ten percent of my finds total.

Yes. A DNF is a sign of failure. I failed to find it.

I seldom log more than one DNF per cache. It adds nothing new, and clutters up the page. I'd rather read the log from the person who found it last than five DNFs from the same person.

No. It is not cheating to fail to log a DNF. It is not required, so failing to do so is not cheating.

If I give it a good search, I log the DNF. If Bonzo Bear chases me away (like he tried to do on Saturday), that might get a note, but not a DNF. (Oh, wait. I was doing maintenance on one of my own caches...)

So yes. Log your DNFs. It is the proper and polite thing to do.

[+JL_HSTRE]

I log a DNF for the first visit and all subsequent visits. The only exception is if there are multiple visits on the same day. I'll combine them in one log.

 

Pretty much agree with this. If I've spent 15+ minutes searching for a cache I'm definitely logging a DNF.

 

Some people will log a DNF if they get to GZ or just near GZ. I usually only log a DNF if I arrive at GZ and perform a search. If I arrive but don't search I will log a Note if the reason seems relevant to others (ex: construction, muggles). But sometimes I just take one look and decide "today I don't feel like dealing with the search I think this cache will require". I do sometimes log a DNF if I spent alot of time trying to reach GZ but am unable to get there.

[+Catydid]

We always log our dnf's if we have actually looked for the cache. What is nice is that sometimes the CO contacts us with info or is willing to give us another subtle hint. I really like getting responses from COs.

[+fizzymagic]

Have I been posting DNFs too quickly? Should I only post a DNF if I'm almost certain the cache is missing - rather than to indicate to others that the cache is a hard bugger to find (at least for me)?

 

You are doing it perfectly. I log a DNF the first time I don't find the cache, and I log another one each time I go back and don't find it. Many cache owners like seeing DNFs, as it shows that their caches are challenging.

[+webscouter.]

Hit goto on the GPS and don't sign a log. DNF

[+WRASTRO]

Hey! I'm up to 353 DNFs! About ten percent of my finds total.

Yes. A DNF is a sign of failure. I failed to find it.

I seldom log more than one DNF per cache. It adds nothing new, and clutters up the page. I'd rather read the log from the person who found it last than five DNFs from the same person.

No. It is not cheating to fail to log a DNF. It is not required, so failing to do so is not cheating.

If I give it a good search, I log the DNF. If Bonzo Bear chases me away (like he tried to do on Saturday), that might get a note, but not a DNF. (Oh, wait. I was doing maintenance on one of my own caches...)

So yes. Log your DNFs. It is the proper and polite thing to do.

I agree except for the page clutter part. Every log is worthy and valuable. Frequently the DNF logs are far more valuable than the found it logs. In my opinion the "clutter up the page" argument is made by those who dont't want to be bothered to actually read the cache description and the logs.

[+Coldgears]

I don't have that kind of time to spend typing things on the internet to post ALL my DNF's. I only log ones I spent an inordinate amount of time on, or that something special and noteworthy happened during my DNF.

[+Walts Hunting]

If I chicken out because of too many muggles, it's a dnf. A dnf seems pretty straight forward to me. Did I find the cache and sign the log? Nope. DNF.

Did I get to the GZ and get my leg chewed off by an angry bear? DNF.

Tornado? DNF.

Didn't put the car in park and it rolled off a cliff and I forgot about caching for the moment? DNF.

 

But hey, everyone plays by their own rules. If they want to cheat, who am I to call them on it?

 

Since there is no rule about logging DNF's failure to do so is not cheating. I log very few of my DNF's. They are mostly micros/nanos in areas where a much larger container would work and there is not reason for one that small. I don't spend more than two minutes looking for micros in the bushes so a DNF wouldn't really be accurate. That is what they have the ignore list for. I think I just passed 1,000 on my ignore list.

[+EdrickV]

I normally post a DNF whenever I can't find the cache and sign the log sheet. I have found that DNF logs on a cache entry can be very useful, it has indicated to me a few times that a cache might be missing. (Granted that isn't always the case.) There was one case where I found the cache but could not get to the log sheet, in that case I posted a note on attempt 1 and a Needs Maintenance on attempt 2.

 

There was another case where I thought I might have found the cache, but without a log sheet and presumably out of position, so I posted a note and sent the CO an e-mail with further details. It turned out that what I'd found was the cache's original container, which had been missing for months. I later went back and found the current container. (Though it, too, was out of position but was still intact.

 

Some caches I've searched for had multiple DNFs logged and turned out to be missing. On one cache that I logged a DNF for the cache owner actually sent me a message saying it was there. Thanks to that DNF log I now have a hint to use if and when I get back to that cache to search for it.

 

As for reasons why people would not want to log a DNF, ego seems to be one possibility. A profile with 500 finds and no DNFs might seem more impressive to them then one with 500 finds and 100 DNFs. There are BTW some caches out there that have more DNFs then finds logged. Like this one:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?guid=fad01922-1de9-4ef2-b780-068556b1ac31

In the case of that cache, I imagine the owner enjoys the DNFs almost as much as the finds, because it shows just how well that cache is hidden. I have not tried that cache and don't know if I'll get the chance or not, but I think it would be cool to try.

[+WRASTRO]

I don't have that kind of time to spend typing things on the internet to post ALL my DNF's. I only log ones I spent an inordinate amount of time on, or that something special and noteworthy happened during my DNF.

You have plenty of time to post here on these forums so I think you do in fact have time to post all of your many, many DNFs.

[+Dovsport]

Still being rather new Ive been logging DNF's after my second visit. If I cant find a cache I will go back in a couple of days and re-try, if at that point Ive not found it I've then been logging a DNF, although when I do find the cache I do mention how many times its been looked for in the log. However reading this thread I'll start logging them on each attempted.

[+power69]

DNF is not a four letter word!

if i'm denied by a muggle, i won't dnf it.

if i can't find it or i'm denied by security, i'll dnf it.

if its a type of hide i don't like, i won't retry it, i'll dnf it and it goes on ignore.

[Clan Riffster]

I don't have that kind of time to spend typing things on the internet to post ALL my DNF's.

Gotcha. Perusing the forums and playing X-Box are way more important than letting a cache owner know their cache was looked for. Frankly, I find such an attitude to be remarkably selfish, but considering your age group, I suppose it's understandable.

 

I don't spend more than two minutes looking for micros in the bushes so a DNF wouldn't really be accurate.

I would think logging a find would be the inaccurate choice.

Regardless of how much time you spend at ground zero, if you did not find the cache, how is a DNF inaccurate?

 

That is what they have the ignore list for.

Sorry Brother. I'm not following. As I understand the process, the DNF log was developed to let a cache owner know that someone looked for their cache but did not find it. I'm not sure how putting a cache onto your ignore list would accomplish this, as I don't think ignore lists are publicly viewable.

[+Rckhnd]

I'm wondering whether there's established etiquette discouraging postings of DNFs until you've made more than one visit to a cache location.

 

I'm relatively new to caching (just reached 100 finds) and especially in the beginning I was posting DNFs after every visit, if I couldn't find a cache after a good 15-30 minutes hunting. But since then I've seen other posts where people have obviously visited a location multiple times, sometimes with companions, before they've found the cache yet they haven't posted any DNFs in the meantime.

 

Have I been posting DNFs too quickly? Should I only post a DNF if I'm almost certain the cache is missing - rather than to indicate to others that the cache is a hard bugger to find (at least for me)?

 

I log at the end of a day. Sometimes I will go back to the same cache twice or more in a day trying to find it. I only post one dnf for that day.

I have also seen logs where it was stated that the person found it after so many tries, but never logged any dnf at all prior to finding it.

[+dfx]

Many cachers use the recent log history to determine whether to go for a particular cache or not, i.e. if the 4 most recent logs aren't all "found its", or if there's at least one or two DNFs in there, then they'll just ignore it and move on. That's why I don't post DNFs in situations like "couldn't get close", it would convey the wrong information.

[+The Jester]

Many cachers use the recent log history to determine whether to go for a particular cache or not, i.e. if the 4 most recent logs aren't all "found its", or if there's at least one or two DNFs in there, then they'll just ignore it and move on. That's why I don't post DNFs in situations like "couldn't get close", it would convey the wrong information.

It's their own fault if they are using partial info. By looking just at the fact there is a DNF or more in the last few logs, without looking at why the DNF (i.e.. read the log), is making poor use of the available info. And not posting a DNF because of someone else's poor decisions is, in itself, a poor decision (IMO).

[Clan Riffster]

That's why I don't post DNFs in situations like "couldn't get close"

Agreed. For the Riffster Clan, anything that keeps me from starting my search gets logged as a note as opposed to a DNF.

[+GeoGeeBee]

 

There is a cache hidden behind the display sheds at a local Home Depot. I pulled into the parking lot last Saturday and kept on going because It was so busy, I couldn't even maneuver my car into that area of the parking lot. I did not post a DNF. I guess in your view, I am a cheater. You really do have a strange perspective on things.

I don't think you're a cheater, but I would have posted the DNF. I think a log saying what you just said above would provide valuable information to people who are looking at the cache listing and thinking about seeking that cache.

[+dfx]

There is a cache hidden behind the display sheds at a local Home Depot. I pulled into the parking lot last Saturday and kept on going because It was so busy, I couldn't even maneuver my car into that area of the parking lot. I did not post a DNF. I guess in your view, I am a cheater. You really do have a strange perspective on things.

I don't think you're a cheater, but I would have posted the DNF. I think a log saying what you just said above would provide valuable information to people who are looking at the cache listing and thinking about seeking that cache.

 

Of course a note saying the same thing would convey the same information, while at the same time not conveying wrong information to those who only look at log types (or automatically filter by recent logs and their types) and not their content.

[+GeoGeeBee]

I don't have that kind of time to spend typing things on the internet to post ALL my DNF's.

 

Oh, the irony!

[+Doctroid]

There is a cache hidden behind the display sheds at a local Home Depot. I pulled into the parking lot last Saturday and kept on going because It was so busy, I couldn't even maneuver my car into that area of the parking lot. I did not post a DNF. I guess in your view, I am a cheater. You really do have a strange perspective on things.

I don't think you're a cheater, but I would have posted the DNF. I think a log saying what you just said above would provide valuable information to people who are looking at the cache listing and thinking about seeking that cache.

 

Of course a note saying the same thing would convey the same information, while at the same time not conveying wrong information to those who only look at log types (or automatically filter by recent logs and their types) and not their content.

 

What "wrong information"? The only way "DNF" would be wrong information is if, in fact, you found it.