finally founds....

[ving]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

[+Panther&Pine]

I log my DNFs. Sometimes they're a bit late (or combined together) because I don't have computer access.

I usually offer help to those who log a DNF on my caches.

[+NeverSummer]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

Thankfully, unless you're using GSAK and displaying the output on your profile, nobody sees your DNF/FI ratio. If people are not logging DNFs, they are doing a disservice to the cache owners. Groundspeak even sent out something about the importance of logging DNFs in their newsletter not long ago.

 

I hope DNFs get logged on my,and any other cache. It helps me know what is going on, and what I might expect when searching.

[+Will IB Ready]

It hurts my pride, but I'm trying to be diligent about logging my DNF's as soon as I walk away the first time.

I don't really care about statistics, but I hate to admit failure.

[+NeverSummer]

It hurts my pride, but I'm trying to be diligent about logging my DNF's as soon as I walk away the first time.

I don't really care about statistics, but I hate to admit failure.

I'm intrigued by this feeling. I'm not trying to call you out or embarrass, but can you explain to me the "it hurts my pride" thing?

[Mr.Yuck]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

 

Have I noticed this? Heck yes, and I often take jabs in my own found log at the "been here many times" crowd who is posting their first log entry on the cache page when they find it. Don't worry, it's almost always people I know. And I only do it when their log is recent to mine, and I happen to notice it. It's quite funny actually, they're blatantly admitting in public they don't log their DNF's. It would make for a great research project for a College Sociology paper or something.

Edited November 24, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

[+Will IB Ready]

It hurts my pride, but I'm trying to be diligent about logging my DNF's as soon as I walk away the first time.

I don't really care about statistics, but I hate to admit failure.

I'm intrigued by this feeling. I'm not trying to call you out or embarrass, but can you explain to me the "it hurts my pride" thing?

If you see the bolded section, it explains it.

I don't quit anything I start, so to attempt a cache and walk away without finding it is like giving up or quitting.

I'll keep looking and looking, not for the smilie face or for the numbers, but as a matter of pride.

[+SwineFlew]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

 

Have I noticed this? Heck yes, and I often take jabs at the "been here many times" crowd who is posting their first log entry on the cache page when they find it. Don't worry, it's almost always people I know. It's quite funny actually, they're blatantly admitting in public they don't log their DNF's. It would make for a great research project for a college sociology paper or something.

They are welcome to go caching with me. Just an extra person to find a cache for me.

[+Totem Clan]

It hurts my pride, but I'm trying to be diligent about logging my DNF's as soon as I walk away the first time.

I don't really care about statistics, but I hate to admit failure.

How is it a failure if the cache is not there.

 

It's only a failure if you fail to help the CO and other cachers. YOU fail only when you DON'T log you DNFs.

[+L0ne.R]

As a cache owner, I want to know if someone thinks one of our caches is missing. If it's a new cache listing I want to know if people have trouble with the coordinates or the hint, so I can make it less frustrating for people - we like them to find our caches and we want them to enjoy the experience. Whether they log a DNF or a Note is up to them. Either way it gets the message out to me and to the next finders that there might be an issue with the cache. I don't really need to know that they could only spend 2 minutes looking for the cache but plan to come back and try again when they have more time. But that's fine if they want to post that in the logs, if their personal dnf stats are important to them.

 

As a finder, if I get the feeling that the CO hid the cache in order to get DNFs - i.e. places it in a pile of rocks and provides no clue, or vague clues (Cvyr bs ebpxf), or non-clues (e.g. Cnex ba Ryz Fgerrg), I'm not going to leave a DNF because it only encourages the CO to put out more frustrating cache hides. I leave a DNF if it's going to help the CO or the next finders.

[+Walts Hunting]

Whether or not to log a DNF is a personal decision and is not a failure. Those who would judge others by their rules might want to read a little scripture. Personally I rarely log a DNF but then I don't go back to them. They go right to the ignore list. I have no responsibility that I don't choose to accept; others don't have the rightl decide what is or isn't my responsibility.

 

I won't judge you if you don't judge me.

[+Will IB Ready]

How is it a failure if the cache is not there.

 

It's only a failure if you fail to help the CO and other cachers. YOU fail only when you DON'T log you DNFs.

Who said the cache isn't there?

The OP is about "hard to find" caches.

 

I must not be expressing myself properly.

I don't cache for any reason except my own personal enjoyment. I enjoy the challenge of the hunt.

I have a hard time admitting when I am unable to make the find, so I will keep coming back until I find it instead of logging the DNF.

Logging a DNF feels like a little badge of shame, but I've been doing it anyway because I know it is helpful to the CO and other cachers.

That was the point of my first post.

[+Totem Clan]

How is it a failure if the cache is not there.

 

It's only a failure if you fail to help the CO and other cachers. YOU fail only when you DON'T log you DNFs.

Who said the cache isn't there?

The OP is about "hard to find" caches.

 

I must not be expressing myself properly.

I don't cache for any reason except my own personal enjoyment. I enjoy the challenge of the hunt.

I have a hard time admitting when I am unable to make the find, so I will keep coming back until I find it instead of logging the DNF.

Logging a DNF feels like a little badge of shame, but I've been doing it anyway because I know it is helpful to the CO and other cachers.

That was the point of my first post.

I log a DNF on a 'hard to find' cache today. In fact it was the second time I've logged a DNF on it. the CO went and checked on it. Sure enough it was gone. It was muggled the first time too.

 

Now tell me how I'm failure if I log DNFs on hard caches.

[+Will IB Ready]

 

Now tell me how I'm failure if I log DNFs on hard caches.

Your only failure is in reading comprehension.

 

I wasn't talking to you or anyone else. I was talking about my own personality flaw...

[+Totem Clan]

 

Now tell me how I'm failure if I log DNFs on hard caches.

Your only failure is in reading comprehension.

 

I wasn't talking to you or anyone else. I was talking about my own personality flaw...

But you're lack of logging DNFs affect us all.

[+Will IB Ready]

But you're lack of logging DNFs affect us all.

I'm trying to be diligent about logging my DNF's

Not sure how I can be any clearer sir.

[+CanadianRockies]

Whether or not to log a DNF is a personal decision and is not a failure. Those who would judge others by their rules might want to read a little scripture. Personally I rarely log a DNF but then I don't go back to them. They go right to the ignore list. I have no responsibility that I don't choose to accept; others don't have the rightl decide what is or isn't my responsibility.

 

I won't judge you if you don't judge me.

Yes, logging a DNF is a personal decision. Just like my opting to push that vehicle that was spinning its tires in the snow this morning was a personal decision. It wasn't a responsibility that someone forced upon me. I just like living in a civilized society where people help each other even if it might involve a bit of personal inconvenience.

 

You might have other priorities, and that's okay.

[+Walts Hunting]

Whether or not to log a DNF is a personal decision and is not a failure. Those who would judge others by their rules might want to read a little scripture. Personally I rarely log a DNF but then I don't go back to them. They go right to the ignore list. I have no responsibility that I don't choose to accept; others don't have the rightl decide what is or isn't my responsibility.

 

I won't judge you if you don't judge me.

Yes, logging a DNF is a personal decision. Just like my opting to push that vehicle that was spinning its tires in the snow this morning was a personal decision. It wasn't a responsibility that someone forced upon me. I just like living in a civilized society where people help each other even if it might involve a bit of personal inconvenience.

 

You might have other priorities, and that's okay.

 

Being retired I spend a good deal of my time doing community work and donate a considerable amount of money to charities but because I don't long DNF's I am not a civilized person. Give me a break you

Edited November 24, 2012 by Walts Hunting

[+CanadianRockies]

Whether or not to log a DNF is a personal decision and is not a failure. Those who would judge others by their rules might want to read a little scripture. Personally I rarely log a DNF but then I don't go back to them. They go right to the ignore list. I have no responsibility that I don't choose to accept; others don't have the rightl decide what is or isn't my responsibility.

 

I won't judge you if you don't judge me.

Yes, logging a DNF is a personal decision. Just like my opting to push that vehicle that was spinning its tires in the snow this morning was a personal decision. It wasn't a responsibility that someone forced upon me. I just like living in a civilized society where people help each other even if it might involve a bit of personal inconvenience.

 

You might have other priorities, and that's okay.

Being retired I spend a good deal of my time doing community work and donate a considerable amount of money to charities but because I don't long DNF's I am not a civilized person. Give me a break you self righteous pompus *&&**&

I wasn't judging you. Indeed, I said it was okay if you had other priorities than mine. Helping others by taking a few moments to log DNFs is ONE way people can help others. Of course there are other ways as well, as you've noted. If you don't want to help others by posting DNFs, then that's okay (again).

 

Also, please be aware that the Groundspeak Forums guidelines include:

 

4. Personal attacks and inflammatory or antagonistic behavior will not be tolerated. If you want to post criticism, please do so constructively. Generalized, vicious or veiled attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

Edited November 24, 2012 by CanadianRockies

[+L0ne.R]

In the original post the cache was there. If the difficulty rating is set high then the expectation is that not every attempt will be a successful one. The CO and fellow finders will understand this by the rating, and comments in the log that it took several attempts. Why is multiple DNFs necessary? In this case, if someone posts a DNF will the CO go out and check to be sure it's in good order? Not likely. They know it's tough. They know it may take multiple attempts.

 

Sometimes multiple DNFs in a row would discourage others from attempting it.

Edited November 24, 2012 by L0ne R

[4wheelin_fool]

In the original post the cache was there. If the difficulty rating is set high then the expectation is that not every attempt will be a successful one. The CO and fellow finders will understand this by the rating, and comments in the log that it took several attempts. Why is multiple DNFs necessary? In this case, if someone posts a DNF will the CO go out an check to be sure it's in good order? Not likely. They know it's tough. They know it may take multiple attempts.

 

Sometimes multiple DNFs in a row would discourage others from attempting it.

 

It can also cause the cache to be disabled. If the owner is MIA, it could also lead to archival. This is why many log DNFs only if they are reasonably certain the cache is missing. Others don't want to be laughed at. Imagine a 200 word DNF followed by a "quick find TFTC" by someone with a dozen finds.

[+briansnat]

It hurts my pride, but I'm trying to be diligent about logging my DNF's as soon as I walk away the first time.

I don't really care about statistics, but I hate to admit failure.

I'm intrigued by this feeling. I'm not trying to call you out or embarrass, but can you explain to me the "it hurts my pride" thing?

 

I never understood why not finding a cache would be considered a failure. I have quite a few DNFs and I don't see them as failures. I enjoyed most of the experiences as much as if I found the cache. The walk is just as pretty, the adventure is as much fun and the cache location is just as interesting regardless of whether or not I find the cache.

 

But getting back to the OP, yes I wish more people would log their DNFs. I've had a few caches that had problems and once I became aware of the issue, it was obvious that people were searching and not logging their DNFs. Had people logged their DNFs I probably would have become aware of the issue earlier.

Edited November 24, 2012 by briansnat

[+cheech gang]

I am proud of my 454 DNF logs. It's all just a part of the overall geocaching experience. I may just host an event to celebrate DNF #500, if I can find the venue.

[AZcachemeister]

It hurts my pride, but I'm trying to be diligent about logging my DNF's as soon as I walk away the first time.

I don't really care about statistics, but I hate to admit failure.

 

It's not a failure, it's a delayed success...unless you quit trying.

 

A DNF, when you intend to return, should be considered a progress report. Many cachers rationalize their not posting the DNF because they are not finished, and plan to return.

 

Although I have done it, you seldom see a log stating,'I've been here six times and can't find it...so now I'm not coming back!' Usually you see 'YAY! Found it on the XXth attempt!', or nothing.

[+Will IB Ready]

 

It's not a failure, it's a delayed success...unless you quit trying.

 

A DNF, when you intend to return, should be considered a progress report. Many cachers rationalize their not posting the DNF because they are not finished, and plan to return.

 

Although I have done it, you seldom see a log stating,'I've been here six times and can't find it...so now I'm not coming back!' Usually you see 'YAY! Found it on the XXth attempt!', or nothing.

I agree. That makes perfect sense.

[+terrkan78]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

For me it's not a matter of having a whole bunch of DNFs (at one point I was running about 50% DNFs), it's more having to do with my ability to leave a civil log when I'm pissed. A few months into this game I went back and read some of my DNF logs and I was appalled. I sounded like a whiny brat. I quit logging DNFs until I could do so without that whiny sound coming through.

 

If I'm not pissed, I'll log a fine DNF. But I find myself getting pissed when (for example) it's a micro in the woods and there's a bazillion places it could be. I give it a couple of hours, I'm soaked from all wet bushes, I quit having fun ten minutes into the search, and I still didn't find the @#$% thing. In that event, I will not log my DNF because I will later be embarrassed at what I said. Sometimes I'll log it a week or two later when I can do so nicely.

 

I've gotten more selective at the caches I hunt for, so this doesn't come up as often as it used to. But it is one of many reasons why people don't log their DNFs.

[Mr.Yuck]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

For me it's not a matter of having a whole bunch of DNFs (at one point I was running about 50% DNFs), it's more having to do with my ability to leave a civil log when I'm pissed. A few months into this game I went back and read some of my DNF logs and I was appalled. I sounded like a whiny brat. I quit logging DNFs until I could do so without that whiny sound coming through.

 

If I'm not pissed, I'll log a fine DNF. But I find myself getting pissed when (for example) it's a micro in the woods and there's a bazillion places it could be. I give it a couple of hours, I'm soaked from all wet bushes, I quit having fun ten minutes into the search, and I still didn't find the @#$% thing. In that event, I will not log my DNF because I will later be embarrassed at what I said. Sometimes I'll log it a week or two later when I can do so nicely.

 

I've gotten more selective at the caches I hunt for, so this doesn't come up as often as it used to. But it is one of many reasons why people don't log their DNFs.

 

Now this is a good point. The very few occasions I have not logged my DNF's is when I was pissed, and went with the "if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" credo. Generally, when I'm taken to a horrifically garbage-filled cache site. But also a few needle in a Haystack type of things. I certainly can't argue with your post, one of the many reasons why people don't log their DNF's.

Edited November 25, 2012 by Mr.Yuck

[AZcachemeister]

 

For me it's not a matter of having a whole bunch of DNFs (at one point I was running about 50% DNFs), it's more having to do with my ability to leave a civil log when I'm pissed. A few months into this game I went back and read some of my DNF logs and I was appalled. I sounded like a whiny brat. I quit logging DNFs until I could do so without that whiny sound coming through.

 

If I'm not pissed, I'll log a fine DNF. But I find myself getting pissed when (for example) it's a micro in the woods and there's a bazillion places it could be. I give it a couple of hours, I'm soaked from all wet bushes, I quit having fun ten minutes into the search, and I still didn't find the @#$% thing. In that event, I will not log my DNF because I will later be embarrassed at what I said. Sometimes I'll log it a week or two later when I can do so nicely.

 

I've gotten more selective at the caches I hunt for, so this doesn't come up as often as it used to. But it is one of many reasons why people don't log their DNFs.

 

WHOOO-BOY you are so very correct!

 

Most of the DNF's I did not log were because I KNEW the owner had placed the cache just to mess with people. In those cases, it's really hard not to use terms like 'scumbag', and 'son-of-a-beehive'...or worse.

Nowadays I just quit looking when it stops being fun, and log my usual boilerplate DNF log.

Maybe I'll find it another day, maybe I won't be back at all.

[+dprovan]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

I don't really think about it. I know some people don't log failures, and I'm used to it.

 

If the cache is truly hard to find, I suppose it would probably be better for some people not to log every single failure, since that would clog up the log with people that are, by definition, clueless, leaving less room in the downloaded logs for logs by people that actually know where the cache is and might provide helpful information about finding it. After all, if the cache is hard to find, why do you, as the owner, want to hear people over and over proclaim that they can't find it? Do you want to gloat about each and every failure?

[+Harry Dolphin]

How is it a failure if the cache is not there.

 

It's only a failure if you fail to help the CO and other cachers. YOU fail only when you DON'T log you DNFs.

Who said the cache isn't there?

The OP is about "hard to find" caches.

 

I must not be expressing myself properly.

I don't cache for any reason except my own personal enjoyment. I enjoy the challenge of the hunt.

I have a hard time admitting when I am unable to make the find, so I will keep coming back until I find it instead of logging the DNF.

Logging a DNF feels like a little badge of shame, but I've been doing it anyway because I know it is helpful to the CO and other cachers.

That was the point of my first post.

I log a DNF on a 'hard to find' cache today. In fact it was the second time I've logged a DNF on it. the CO went and checked on it. Sure enough it was gone. It was muggled the first time too.

 

Now tell me how I'm failure if I log DNFs on hard caches.

 

You have failed to find the cache. That is a failure. Simple English.

Myself, I will almost always log a failure once. Very seldom more than once. Two DNFs helps no one. Most DNFs help no one. Other that to show that I have failed. And yes, I have logged over 450 DNFs.

[+CanadianRockies]

Myself, I will almost always log a failure once. Very seldom more than once. Two DNFs helps no one.

I'll log multiple DNFs for a cache. The second time I search, I'll usually look even more carefully and often over a wider area. In general, my additional DNFs indicate the caches are more likely to be tough finds or more likely to have gone missing.

[+Student Camper]

You have failed to find the cache. That is a failure. Simple English.

Myself, I will almost always log a failure once. Very seldom more than once. Two DNFs helps no one. Most DNFs help no one. Other that to show that I have failed. And yes, I have logged over 450 DNFs.

 

I have to disagree,

To not find the cache is NOT a failure, it is a setback, to quit and go home because you didn't find it, that is a failure.

 

If you fail to get the ball in the hoop do you try again?, or do you quit trying and look upon it as a failure?

 

In the long run, DNFs are a very important part of the game,

It is a game, is it not?

 

Have you logged over 450 DNFs or have you logged over 450 failures?

In my mind, there is a difference as I do not log failures.

[+Totem Clan]

I have to disagree,

To not find the cache is NOT a failure, it is a setback, to quit and go home because you didn't find it, that is a failure.

 

If you fail to get the ball in the hoop do you try again?, or do you quit trying and look upon it as a failure?

 

In the long run, DNFs are a very important part of the game,

It is a game, is it not?

 

Have you logged over 450 DNFs or have you logged over 450 failures?

In my mind, there is a difference as I do not log failures.

yep

I logged 5 DNF's on one cache before I found. That was no failure. In fact it's still one of my favorite caches.

[+WarNinjas]

I would never feel bad about not finding a cache. However we only log DNFs if we feel the cache is missing and not if we just cant find it. That is just us and we wish cachers would log if they DNF a cache of ours.

-WarNinjs

[4wheelin_fool]

I just received a few unusual cache disable notifications. A few paddle-tos and a regular were disabled by a reviewer in response to an e-mail. There have been no DNFs posted, and it is much too cold to do any paddling (in the 30s).

But now the cache owner has to check the paddle-tos within 30 days, or they will be archived.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2XQA7

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2XQ8E

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2X71G

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_details.aspx?wp=GC2X71W

 

Hi,

 

I received an e-mail from a concerned cacher who attempted to do this series and was unable to find a single one. A second e-mail from a different cacher makes me believe that this series may no longer be here. I'm disabling this series until the owner has a chance to confirm that they are there.

 

If I've heard nothing in 30 days, I will be forced to archive this listing.

 

Thanks,

-O

[+dprovan]

Myself, I will almost always log a failure once. Very seldom more than once. Two DNFs helps no one. Most DNFs help no one. Other that to show that I have failed.

If I feel it's warranted -- such as I searched differently in a way I should note -- and no one has found it since my first DNF, I'll edit the first DNF to add the additional information, updating the date and saving the date of the original DNF in the text. Not only do multiple DNF logs not help, they knock other logs out of the PQ log slots that could have logs that might provide some helpful advice because they were written by people that found the cache.

[+dprovan]

I just received a few unusual cache disable notifications. A few paddle-tos and a regular were disabled by a reviewer in response to an e-mail. There have been no DNFs posted, and it is much too cold to do any paddling (in the 30s).

Yeah, that sounds really odd. I would have expected the reviewer to, at the very least, require the person having a problem post a DNF before they'd agree to take action. It's as if there's some additional story about the relation between the DNFer and the CO that makes the DNFer desperate for anonymity.

 

One would have to assume that a note saying they'll be checked after the thaw would be enough to keep them from getting archived. (If not, then there must be even more to the secret story about what's going on here.)

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I just received a few unusual cache disable notifications. A few paddle-tos and a regular were disabled by a reviewer in response to an e-mail. There have been no DNFs posted, and it is much too cold to do any paddling (in the 30s).

Yeah, that sounds really odd. I would have expected the reviewer to, at the very least, require the person having a problem post a DNF before they'd agree to take action. It's as if there's some additional story about the relation between the DNFer and the CO that makes the DNFer desperate for anonymity.

 

One would have to assume that a note saying they'll be checked after the thaw would be enough to keep them from getting archived. (If not, then there must be even more to the secret story about what's going on here.)

 

I've paddled in the area where those caches are located and there likely wouldn't be issues related to the water being frozen and require a thaw. It doesn't matter so much that the air temperatures might be in the 30's as it is that the water temperature may be in the 40's. If I owned those cache I'd probably disable them over the winter so that nobody is encouraged to look for them when the water temperature is so low that an inadvertent capsize could easily lead to hypothermia and even death. There are probably more paddling fatalities in April when there is a warm spring day but the water is still in the low 40's that there are in January when both the water and air temperature is low

[+OZ2CPU]

a DNF log is MORE important, over a found it log..

it helps others more than it hurts,

be honost, if you cared to go there, and actually looked,

but did not find it, tell what you did, and how hard you looked,

be a friend.

Edited November 26, 2012 by OZ2CPU

[+Totem Clan]

a DNF log is MORE important, over a found it log..

it helps others more than it hurts,

be honost, if you cared to go there, and actually looked,

but did not find it, tell what you did, and how hard you looked,

be a friend.

Very well said.

[+angel77ra]

I typically log a DNF on my first visit. Maybe the next few if it is important to let others know the status of the cache. I also will change my DNF to a smiley. I have had a few cachers that clog the logs with multiple DNF'S, notes and then their final smiley. Do you guys add new logs or edit logs as you go?

[+redsox_mark]

I never change a DNF to a find later. The DNF log related to that point in time. If at a later point in time I found it, that is a different log.

[ving]

gee i didnt really plan on opening a can of worms like this. sorry.

 

my view being that logs be them finds on not are helpful on any cache with deciding if the rating needs to be changed for one. If i have a cache that is a d2 and 90% of the logs are DNF then obviously I would need to reevaluate the rating of the cache right? the same the other way...

 

lets say i have a D5 cache and there are 20 logged visits, only 2 of these are DNF. this is going to make me think that its a lot easier than a D5 and maybe i should make it a D2... when the fact is that some of those who have logged a find had actually been there to look for it half a dozen times before and not logged their DNF.

 

I log 95% of my DNFs... the other 5% I am not logging usually cause its a "i'll do it tomorrow" thing... we know what happens to those.

 

please be civil here guys, I didnt want arguments and personal stabs just opinions.

[+Don_J]

In the original post the cache was there. If the difficulty rating is set high then the expectation is that not every attempt will be a successful one. The CO and fellow finders will understand this by the rating, and comments in the log that it took several attempts. Why is multiple DNFs necessary? In this case, if someone posts a DNF will the CO go out an check to be sure it's in good order? Not likely. They know it's tough. They know it may take multiple attempts.

 

Sometimes multiple DNFs in a row would discourage others from attempting it.

 

It can also cause the cache to be disabled. If the owner is MIA, it could also lead to archival. This is why many log DNFs only if they are reasonably certain the cache is missing. Others don't want to be laughed at. Imagine a 200 word DNF followed by a "quick find TFTC" by someone with a dozen finds.

 

Followed by a "Arrrrrgh!".

I've had this happen to me many times and I'm sure that I'm laughing just as hard as the others. I really try not to take it too seriously.

 

I also posted my third DNF, and admittedly it was my fifth time looking, on a cache and later that day it got a "This was my first find". I went back and threw out everything I knew about how a cache should be hidden, and there it was.

[+Don_J]

If I feel it's warranted -- such as I searched differently in a way I should note -- and no one has found it since my first DNF, I'll edit the first DNF to add the additional information, updating the date and saving the date of the original DNF in the text. Not only do multiple DNF logs not help, they knock other logs out of the PQ log slots that could have logs that might provide some helpful advice because they were written by people that found the cache.

 

I typically log a DNF on my first visit. Maybe the next few if it is important to let others know the status of the cache. I also will change my DNF to a smiley. I have had a few cachers that clog the logs with multiple DNF'S, notes and then their final smiley. Do you guys add new logs or edit logs as you go?

 

From my perspective as a cache owner, I wish that people would never edit logs. When you post a log, I get a copy of it emailed to me. When you later edit it, I get nothing, not even a notification that it has been edited. Unless I have a specific reason to go to the cache listing, (and I have 128 active ones), and read all of the logs, I have no idea that anything is different than the emailed copies that I received.

 

If you are adding important information that may benefit me to your now re-dated DNF log, I don't see it.

If you change your log from a DNF to a Find, I don't know it and I may just make a special trip on your behalf to check on it.

 

Editing old logs is a really bad idea.

Just my POV...

[+Don_J]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

For me it's not a matter of having a whole bunch of DNFs (at one point I was running about 50% DNFs), it's more having to do with my ability to leave a civil log when I'm pissed. A few months into this game I went back and read some of my DNF logs and I was appalled. I sounded like a whiny brat. I quit logging DNFs until I could do so without that whiny sound coming through.

 

If I'm not pissed, I'll log a fine DNF. But I find myself getting pissed when (for example) it's a micro in the woods and there's a bazillion places it could be. I give it a couple of hours, I'm soaked from all wet bushes, I quit having fun ten minutes into the search, and I still didn't find the @#$% thing. In that event, I will not log my DNF because I will later be embarrassed at what I said. Sometimes I'll log it a week or two later when I can do so nicely.

 

I've gotten more selective at the caches I hunt for, so this doesn't come up as often as it used to. But it is one of many reasons why people don't log their DNFs.

 

Why in the world would you still be there hours later if you stopped having fun ten minutes after you arrived?

[+Don_J]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

 

I put four caches out on a trail. #3 turned out to much more difficult than I ever intended. There have been at least seven people that have walked the trail and posted finds on #1, #2 and #4, and not a word on #3. I'm pretty sure that they are not just walking by without stopping. Two others have posted multiple DNFs. As a cache owner, I want feedback. Good, bad, whatever. I went to look for a new cache once and checked one of mine on the way. The last six people had signed over other people's names because the log was full. Not one of them said a word in their logs.

 

As far as statistics, I'm proud of mine. 429 DNFs and counting.

[+dprovan]

From my perspective as a cache owner, I wish that people would never edit logs. When you post a log, I get a copy of it emailed to me. When you later edit it, I get nothing, not even a notification that it has been edited. Unless I have a specific reason to go to the cache listing, (and I have 128 active ones), and read all of the logs, I have no idea that anything is different than the emailed copies that I received.

I understand that, but my additional information isn't really for the CO as much as it's for later seekers. It doesn't provide the CO any additional information, since presumably I'm making the same stupid mistake I made the first time. I assume when the CO starts to consider whether there's a problem because of multiple DNFs, then he'll look at the cache page in case I've added anything he'd find illuminating.

 

By the way, you also don't get the complete log if I post a log, Found it or not, and then realize I've made a mistake or omitted something important and edit it to correct the problem. So you probably shouldn't be so confident that you're getting everything if you only look at what's in the e-mail. I'm certainly not going to post a second note for your benefit to say, "I meant to say it was NOT in good shape," I'm just going to fix my log.

[+Totem Clan]

If I feel it's warranted -- such as I searched differently in a way I should note -- and no one has found it since my first DNF, I'll edit the first DNF to add the additional information, updating the date and saving the date of the original DNF in the text. Not only do multiple DNF logs not help, they knock other logs out of the PQ log slots that could have logs that might provide some helpful advice because they were written by people that found the cache.

 

I typically log a DNF on my first visit. Maybe the next few if it is important to let others know the status of the cache. I also will change my DNF to a smiley. I have had a few cachers that clog the logs with multiple DNF'S, notes and then their final smiley. Do you guys add new logs or edit logs as you go?

 

From my perspective as a cache owner, I wish that people would never edit logs. When you post a log, I get a copy of it emailed to me. When you later edit it, I get nothing, not even a notification that it has been edited. Unless I have a specific reason to go to the cache listing, (and I have 128 active ones), and read all of the logs, I have no idea that anything is different than the emailed copies that I received.

 

If you are adding important information that may benefit me to your now re-dated DNF log, I don't see it.

If you change your log from a DNF to a Find, I don't know it and I may just make a special trip on your behalf to check on it.

 

Editing old logs is a really bad idea.

Just my POV...

I couldn't agree more.

[+Totem Clan]

anyone here got a hard to find cache? how do you feel about people whos first log entry goes something like "I have tried this cache so many times but finally today its in my hands!". of course what i am getting at here is that there are a bunch of people out there that dont log their did not finds and this could happen several times with one person. you could have had hundreds of visits but not know.

 

I am guessing its all about statistics. it doesnt look good to have a whole bunch of DNFs on ones record... :/

 

anyhow, whats your thoughts on the matter?

 

I put four caches out on a trail. #3 turned out to much more difficult than I ever intended. There have been at least seven people that have walked the trail and posted finds on #1, #2 and #4, and not a word on #3. I'm pretty sure that they are not just walking by without stopping. Two others have posted multiple DNFs. As a cache owner, I want feedback. Good, bad, whatever. I went to look for a new cache once and checked one of mine on the way. The last six people had signed over other people's names because the log was full. Not one of them said a word in their logs.

 

As far as statistics, I'm proud of mine. 429 DNFs and counting.

On the other side of that, I put out a series on a trail where a couple of the caches proved harder to find than I wanted. Lucky for me some of the first cachers to go after them were the local cachers that log all their DNFs and such. That alerted me to the problem one cache has been moved just a little and both now have good clues on them. All the caches are now being found as intended. Without the DNF I would not have known there was a problem.