Multiple Searches For Caches

[+John714]

New to geocaching, just got 1 cache find under my belt. Is there a rule set in place that says you are limited to the number of times you can look for a paticular cache? For example, Say I go looking for a local cache, I dont find it the first time. So I go back a second time the next day, and again dont find it, then a third day with the same result. After this many times, I am obligated to just log it on the website as a "Did Not Find"? Or is it at my descretion to decide when I choose to do this? I just dont want to do something thats frowned upon and strictly want to adhere to the rules.

 

Thanks guys!

[+ngrrfan]

New to geocaching, just got 1 cache find under my belt. Is there a rule set in place that says you are limited to the number of times you can look for a paticular cache? For example, Say I go looking for a local cache, I dont find it the first time. So I go back a second time the next day, and again dont find it, then a third day with the same result. After this many times, I am obligated to just log it on the website as a "Did Not Find"? Or is it at my descretion to decide when I choose to do this? I just dont want to do something thats frowned upon and strictly want to adhere to the rules.

 

Thanks guys!

You can search for a cache as many times as you want, and log your DNFs as you see fit.

[Pontoffel Pock]

If you fail after a few times, send the cache owner a message asking for a bit of help.

[+TomToad]

You log a DNF any time you search for a cache and fail to find it. It is common to log several DNFs on a cache, especially a difficult one, before finally finding the cache and getting a smiley. A DNF does not indicate a failure, it is just simply a record of your visit, and also indicates a potential problem to the cache owner - if several cachers log a DNF, could mean the cache might be missing.

[+niraD]

Every time I search for a cache, I log either a Find or a DNF. My record so far has been 6 DNF logs for a single cache.

[+briansnat]

I have 7 DNFs logged for one cache (never did find it). I'll log a DNF for every fruitless search. The only exception is that if I search more than once in a day, say an attempt in the morning and another in the evening, I'll combine those into a single log and mention in it that I was there multiple times that day.

Edited October 9, 2012 by briansnat

[+dprovan]

These days I'm always driving somewhere to get multiple caches, so I rarely return for multiple attempts of a failure. But when I was starting out, I'd return multiple times for caches that were along my path walking from here to there around home or work. When I repeatedly DNF'd a cache, I'd sometimes log them all, but more often I'd log only the first. In some cases, if there were no intervening logs, I'd edit my previous DNF, adding information about my latest failure, moving the old date into the text, and changing the log's official date to reflect this latest attempt.

 

The problem with logging each and every DNF is that each DNF pushes one more log from a successful seeker out of the limited number of logs delivered in pocket queries. Assuming the cache is actually still there, that's one less log that might provide a helpful clue that's been replaced with your DNF that can't possibly be of any help. While multiple DNFs from multiple seekers does the same thing, that in itself is useful information, but learning that one seeker might have a problem with this particular hide style is not.

 

Oh, to answer the original question: look as often as you like! There's no limit! If you like the location, you can even return and -- gasp! -- not look for it! Oh, that reminds me: one thing I sometimes do if I'm having problems with a find is come look for it without bringing my GPSr. After you've looked several times, you know the location, which you've confirmed by looking at the space view on-line, of course, you know the description, you know the hints, you know the other logs -- including all the old ones you've read on-line -- so the GPSr doesn't do anything except distract you from looking. This has worked for me several times now.

[+stijnhommes]

I only log DNFs when I've made a serious attempt to find a cache. If I pass by a cache location and do a half-hearted "search" in passing, I won't log it.

Other than that, I log every DNF I have.

 

To the OP: You can go look for a cache as often as you want, and you are not required to log a DNF, but you should consider it because it really helps cache owners and your fellow cachers.

It's not a failure on your part. Your public profile won't even list them.

[+Chief301]

If it's a fairly run-of-the-mill cache I'll usually only log my first failed attempt but not any subsequent DNF's. Sometimes if it's a unique or exceptional cache that is supposed to be particularly hard to find or get to (based on the D/T rating or previous logs) I'll log every attempt, because sometimes those sorts of DNF's make for some interesting logs. 😊

 

If I went to the area but never actually searched for the cache (like if there were too many muggles around or something like that), I'll usually just post a note.

 

But hey, do it whatever way suits you! Different people play the game different ways. The guidelines are just that, guidelines. You won't get banned or "lose" the game if you do it different than the next guy 😎

[+Wacka]

There is one cache in my area that has about as many DNFs (228) as finds (236) . It's a badge of honor to DNF it on your first attempt. Took me 5-6 tries and I have found over 8K caches.

[+popokiiti]

I'll log a DNF every time I am unsuccessful. Could be that multiple DNFs mean there is a problem - cache is missing, or coords need tweaking, or that the difficulty/terrain need adjusting. We DNFd a 1 terrain, searched accordingly and it turned out the cache was where the GPSs finally zeroed out....down some steep stairs.

[+ngrrfan]

We DNFd a 1 terrain, searched accordingly and it turned out the cache was where the GPSs finally zeroed out....down some steep stairs.

Yeah... some COs are too lazy to rate their caches appropriately. On those, I post a NM (needs maintenance) as it is obviously in the wrong place and the cords are wrong.

[+maxx borchovski]

I log my DNFs, I don't know if a cache is missing or not. I then put the cache on my watch list. Once I see it has been found I try to go back. If it is missing and a few more people log DNFs the cache owner can go fix the problem. How do they know its missing if nobody logs DNFs.

[+Harry Dolphin]

You log a DNF any time you search for a cache and fail to find it. It is common to log several DNFs on a cache, especially a difficult one, before finally finding the cache and getting a smiley. A DNF does not indicate a failure, it is just simply a record of your visit, and also indicates a potential problem to the cache owner - if several cachers log a DNF, could mean the cache might be missing.

 

Logging a DNF is not required. And it is a failure.

Too many DNFs and I don't bother looking for a cache. If the page is cluttered with too many DNFs by the same person, it's terrible clutter.

Myself, I almost never log more than one DNF prcache. Cuts down on the clutter, and lets the legitimate log show on paperless GPS units. And that's a legitimate concern: page clutter. I do log almost all DNFs (unless it's obvious that the CO is being nasty.)

That being said: I went for a cache with 5 DNFs, but only because the CO checked on it in between. Usually, if the cache has 3 DNFs, I don't bother looking.

So, OP, it's your option to log as many DNFs as you want, but it is not required.