Jump to content

DNF logging etiquette ...


Recommended Posts

Greetings Cachers, relatively new to this and love it!.

 

First Question

If you visit the GZ of a cache and can't locate it multiple times, say 2-3 times over a few weeks or months. Do you log a "DNF" every time? Is there a general etiquette to this?

 

Second Question

Does it show up on the caches DNF stats every time you log it as a DNF. Say a cache has (5) DNF's, and you logged it DNF 3 times, are 3 of the 5 yours? Would hate to inflate a cache's stats that way.

Link to comment

Hi, and welcome to the game!

 

I would log every DNF, because every one does reflect a visit and an attempt. This is useful info for people that follow. Most cachers, I think, feel that every DNF should be logged.

 

An exception would be, if you're in a group. I think a single DNF log from someone in the group would suffice in that case.

 

EDIT: To your second question, yes, yes. But if you can't find it on three separate occasions, there's a higher chance it's gone missing, so three DNF logs wouldn't be out of line. (Sometimes caches are MUCH more findable on a re-visit, thanks to how the previous finder left it. But sometimes not, if they've gone missing.)

Edited by Viajero Perdido
Link to comment

Greetings Cachers, relatively new to this and love it!.

 

First Question

If you visit the GZ of a cache and can't locate it multiple times, say 2-3 times over a few weeks or months. Do you log a "DNF" every time? Is there a general etiquette to this?

 

 

Many would log each DNF.

 

If the difficulty rating is under 3 stars, I would log the first DNF then an immediate NM, if there have already been several DNFs posted. If there has already been an NM posted and several DNFs and before the DNFs people were finding it regularly then I will post an NA with a log that outlines the number of NMs and DNFs and the the cache needs attention. However, if it's a high D rating, then I would log several DNFs, although I'm unlikely to search for high D rated caches - I don't enjoy not finding a cache.

Link to comment

First question: I've seen it both ways. I generally only log the first DNF, unless something really noteworthy or amusing happened during the later search, or a very long time had elapsed since the previous attempt. Either way would be acceptable.

 

Second question: I'm not positive, but I think yes, the stats would show all DNF's including multiples from the same person.

Link to comment
If the difficulty rating is under 3 stars, I would log the first DNF then an immediate NM

I disagree, I wouldn't do the NM. The owner can make their own judgement call on that.

 

I think NM should be for cases when you know something that isn't apparent from the logs, eg, chewed up by a coyote, flattened by a bulldozer, etc.

Link to comment
If the difficulty rating is under 3 stars, I would log the first DNF then an immediate NM

I disagree, I wouldn't do the NM. The owner can make their own judgement call on that.

 

I think NM should be for cases when you know something that isn't apparent from the logs, eg, chewed up by a coyote, flattened by a bulldozer, etc.

 

 

'If the difficulty rating is under 3 stars, I would log the first DNF then an immediate NM, if there have already been several DNFs posted.'

I should add... and no response from the cache owner. I also check their profile to see if they have logged in within the last 4+ months.

Edited by L0ne.R
Link to comment

If you visit the GZ of a cache and can't locate it multiple times, say 2-3 times over a few weeks or months. Do you log a "DNF" every time?

 

I generally wouldn't log multiple DNFs unless there was something unique about each one--for instance I was with a different person each time.

Link to comment

If you visit the GZ of a cache and can't locate it multiple times, say 2-3 times over a few weeks or months. Do you log a "DNF" every time? Is there a general etiquette to this?

It depends. I'll log something if I think there's anything more to say. Sometimes it's important that someone looked again, so I'll log it. Other times, it's clear that this one's mainly just stumping me because it's as hard as it's rated, so I won't bother.

 

When I do log subsequent DNFs, if my previous DNF is the still the most recent log, I'll sometimes edit the previous log instead of adding separate log, adding a date to my original comments, updating the date on the log entry, and adding additional comments at the top.

 

Sorry, missed that important bit of context.

 

But still, anyone can see the situation from the logs...

I log an NM when there are multiple DNFs not because I don't think everyone can see the situation if they read the logs but because I don't think the CO is paying attention to what's in the logs. It is also the next step towards Needs Archived if that's what needs to happen.

Link to comment

Especially when I was new, I logged a DNF every visit where I couldn't find the caches I was seeking.

 

DNF is not a "bad" mark on your "record". If anything for my efforts, I received help from the kind, helpful cache owners when I was having a hard time with a find.

 

Now, that was an experience specific to time and location. Now that I've bounced around a bit during my geocaching "career", I've noticed that situation I grew used to in my early days as a member of geocaching.com has changed. You can't guarantee that every area has kind, helpful owners that are willing to reach out when they see someone has a string of DNFs on their cache(s).

 

Now, it's been a while since I have seen a string of DNFs from a single seeker of one of my caches. But, when I do see it happen, I make a point to email the person and ask where they have been looking, what they have seen in the area around the cache, etc. It helps me, as an owner, decide if I need to visit my cache to see that it is still there, or if I can help the seeker learn something about the game that they might not realize.

 

For example, if I see that a new cacher has a string of DNFs on a lamp post hide, I would think that they didn't realize that those skirts can be lifted. (take that to the Out of Context thread...) So, if it were my cache, I'd email the seeker and work with them to help the lightbulb turn on in their mind.

 

But, each of the millions of geocachers around the world are much different than myself, or those I cached with/around back in Portland, OR. As many threads here about things like DNFs, FTF hunts, and adding attributes for whatever new idea will show us, there are many ways people play this game, and they mostly all do so according to the guidelines. That means anyone can decide how they log a DNF (if they do at all... <_< ), and how often they log a DNF for the same cache. My advice is to log one every single time you hunt and don't find.

Link to comment

Sorry, missed that important bit of context.

 

But still, anyone can see the situation from the logs...

Assuming that there's any evidence that the cache owner reads the logs on their caches...

 

Some clearly do; others very clearly don't. In those cases a NM log might just prompt them into action and, in the circumstances described, isn't unreasonable.

Link to comment
If you visit the GZ of a cache and can't locate it multiple times, say 2-3 times over a few weeks or months. Do you log a "DNF" every time? Is there a general etiquette to this?
If I reach GZ and search for the cache, then I log either a Find or a DNF. There have been a few exceptions (e.g., a Note I posted for a recon visit to special-equipment-required cache, when I knew I couldn't retrieve the cache and just wanted to verify what special equipment I should bring next time), but not many. My record is 6 DNFs before finally finding the cache on the 7th trip.

 

As far as "general etiquette", you can already see that practices vary. Some don't post DNFs at all, some post DNFs more freely than I do, and others post DNFs with more restraint than I do.

 

Does it show up on the caches DNF stats every time you log it as a DNF. Say a cache has (5) DNF's, and you logged it DNF 3 times, are 3 of the 5 yours? Would hate to inflate a cache's stats that way.
I don't think you're "inflating" a cache's stats. If you searched for the cache and didn't find it, then that's a DNF. If the cache has a low difficulty rating and accumulates a lot of DNFs, the that might help the CO realize that its difficulty is underrated. Or vice versa.
Link to comment

Greetings Cachers, relatively new to this and love it!.

 

First Question

If you visit the GZ of a cache and can't locate it multiple times, say 2-3 times over a few weeks or months. Do you log a "DNF" every time? Is there a general etiquette to this?

 

Second Question

Does it show up on the caches DNF stats every time you log it as a DNF. Say a cache has (5) DNF's, and you logged it DNF 3 times, are 3 of the 5 yours? Would hate to inflate a cache's stats that way.

 

I log a DNF for every visit. The only exception would be multiple visits in a day. Those I would combine into a single log mentioning that I tried twice (or however many times) that day.

Link to comment

The only time I don't log a DNF is when another person in the hunting group for that time has already done so. The stories in DNF logs are part of the 'payment' a cache owner gets for placing caches; the information in the DNF logs are important to the cache owner, regarding the possible current condition at the location of the cache.

Link to comment

I'm a little unusual ... I will log my first DNF on a cache, but subsequent failures I'll log as notes rather as DNFs. Mostly, that's because I want my found/not-found stats to reflect caches, not attempts. I see the value in logging every visit, though ... which is why I'll use notes for the subsequent visits.

 

But I don't know anyone else who caches that way other than me. Hey, I'm playing the game the way I want to play it, right? :)

Link to comment

If you look for a cache and don't find it then surely a "Didn't find" log is exactly what you're looking for.

 

If you go out and look for it again, then what's changed?

 

As an owner, I always want to know when a cache hasn't been found - irrespective of whether that's the first or fifteenth attempt.

Link to comment

The only time I don't log a DNF is when another person in the hunting group for that time has already done so. The stories in DNF logs are part of the 'payment' a cache owner gets for placing caches; the information in the DNF logs are important to the cache owner, regarding the possible current condition at the location of the cache.

 

Naw. I usually only log one DNF per cache. That tells the CO all s/he needs to know: That I'm logging my failure. He doesn't need to know that I'm really stupid and can trip over the 1/1 cache five times without finding it. And I certainly do not want to feed the ego of the CO with the 1/1 find that is neither. Those deliberately nasty hides. Thanks. I'll log my failure once. Once is enough to inflate the CO's ego.

Link to comment

No. No it doesn't tell the CO all they need to know. Very strange to believe otherwise.

 

'Experienced finder didn't find once' and 'Experienced finder didn't find on five separate visits' are two totally different things. No?

 

Yup, it does. It is a nano glued to the bottom of a piece of ballast, in a pile of ballast. Ego inflating nasty cache. He doesn't need to know that I looked for it more than once.

Nano hidden in a fence/gate with the coords 70 feet off. He doesn't need to know that I looked more than once. I don't inflate egos of nasty hiders.

Link to comment

No. No it doesn't tell the CO all they need to know. Very strange to believe otherwise.

 

'Experienced finder didn't find once' and 'Experienced finder didn't find on five separate visits' are two totally different things. No?

 

Yup, it does. It is a nano glued to the bottom of a piece of ballast, in a pile of ballast. Ego inflating nasty cache. He doesn't need to know that I looked for it more than once.

Nano hidden in a fence/gate with the coords 70 feet off. He doesn't need to know that I looked more than once. I don't inflate egos of nasty hiders.

 

I will generally log a DNF on each visit where I failed to find. I think in general this gives information to the cache owner as well as future finders. My hides are not nasty. With a single DNF on one of my hides I probably won't take action, but with multiple ones I'll go out and check it.

 

As a finder if I see a history of multiple cachers with multiple DNFs on a cache that tells me something (and makes me feel better when I can't find it).

 

But I'm not a slave to some strict DNF rule which says "I pressed go on the GPS so I must log a find or a DNF even if I didn't even reach GZ to look". I'll log an DNF when I think it adds value.

 

Of course there is no obligation to log multiple DNFs; and if you think the cache owner is being "nasty" and you want to log just one that's fine and I can understand that.

Link to comment

The DNF log and the NM log each have a different purpose. Like a "found it" log, a DNF, records your experience with the cache. It may or may not indicate there is a proiblem. A NM is a request to the CO to perform some maintenance. In my opinion, if I ask someone to do something (take time out of their life to maintain their cache) I owe them a description of what needs to be done (container is leaking and needs to be replaced, log sheet is full , etc) so they can come with the necessary materials. It is a rare instance where I can accurately assess a need for maintenance on a cache I have not found, unless there are extenuating circumstances (GZ has been leveled with a bulldozer and contains no features that could comceal a cache).

Link to comment

No. No it doesn't tell the CO all they need to know. Very strange to believe otherwise.

 

'Experienced finder didn't find once' and 'Experienced finder didn't find on five separate visits' are two totally different things. No?

 

Yup, it does. It is a nano glued to the bottom of a piece of ballast, in a pile of ballast. Ego inflating nasty cache. He doesn't need to know that I looked for it more than once.

Nano hidden in a fence/gate with the coords 70 feet off. He doesn't need to know that I looked more than once. I don't inflate egos of nasty hiders.

:It depends on the situation, I know cases where a cache wasnt re-hidden correctly and moved by finders, thus the cache ended up a distance from the original hide. Multiple DNFs flag a CO to know there is a problem. As a cacher Ill often take a stab at a cache with 1-2 DNFs as the most recent logs. However if there is a persistent string of DNFs it raised a few flags and Ill take a closer look. If its a known evil cache with a high rating like http://coord.info/GC4JZWE Electric Mayhem I may take a stab at it. However if its a 1.5 with 6 DNFs odds are there is an issue with the cache missing and its not worth my time to try and find a nonexistent cache.

Link to comment

No. No it doesn't tell the CO all they need to know. Very strange to believe otherwise.

 

'Experienced finder didn't find once' and 'Experienced finder didn't find on five separate visits' are two totally different things. No?

 

Yup, it does. It is a nano glued to the bottom of a piece of ballast, in a pile of ballast. Ego inflating nasty cache. He doesn't need to know that I looked for it more than once.

Nano hidden in a fence/gate with the coords 70 feet off. He doesn't need to know that I looked more than once. I don't inflate egos of nasty hiders.

But until you find the cache how do you know it's a "ego inflating nasty cache"? Or do you assume that because you can't find a second (third, fourth,...) time it's a nasty hide?

 

--------------------------------

 

I try to log every hunt - my record is 7 DNF's (over several months with multiple finds in between) and then the cache was archived before I ever found it.

Link to comment

Greetings Cachers, relatively new to this and love it!.

 

First Question

If you visit the GZ of a cache and can't locate it multiple times, say 2-3 times over a few weeks or months. Do you log a "DNF" every time? Is there a general etiquette to this?

 

Second Question

Does it show up on the caches DNF stats every time you log it as a DNF. Say a cache has (5) DNF's, and you logged it DNF 3 times, are 3 of the 5 yours? Would hate to inflate a cache's stats that way.

 

I log a DNF for every visit. The only exception would be multiple visits in a day. Those I would combine into a single log mentioning that I tried twice (or however many times) that day.

 

This is what we do.

Link to comment

No. No it doesn't tell the CO all they need to know. Very strange to believe otherwise.

 

'Experienced finder didn't find once' and 'Experienced finder didn't find on five separate visits' are two totally different things. No?

 

Yup, it does. It is a nano glued to the bottom of a piece of ballast, in a pile of ballast. Ego inflating nasty cache. He doesn't need to know that I looked for it more than once.

Nano hidden in a fence/gate with the coords 70 feet off. He doesn't need to know that I looked more than once. I don't inflate egos of nasty hiders.

But until you find the cache how do you know it's a "ego inflating nasty cache"? Or do you assume that because you can't find a second (third, fourth,...) time it's a nasty hide?

 

--------------------------------

 

I try to log every hunt - my record is 7 DNF's (over several months with multiple finds in between) and then the cache was archived before I ever found it.

 

I'd broadly agree on both counts. I remember one cache I found, near a family member's house abroad, that I found on my eighth attempt spanning three visits over four years. I kept going back, partly because it was so close and partly because it was a nice place to be and I could combine hunting the cache with watching the local birds of prey soaring. Eventually I found it, logged my find, and shortly afterwards got a note from a guy who lived a few miles away thanking me for posting so much because his kids were getting discouraged and he could point to my logs and say that if a guy from England kept coming back until he found it then they could too.

 

If the cache appears to be a nano in a pile of ballast I rate that as a mindlessly repetitive search. Personally I get zero pleasure from hunting things like that so I'd write a note to say I saw the area, couldn't be bothered to hunt for it, and would then ignore the cache.

Link to comment

I have a couple with more than one DNF. In one case, I was the first log on a cache that was published a week or so earlier. I was working from memory since I just happened to be driving by and since the CO works at a tattoo shop and the location looked to be where a tattoo shop was located I looked where it seemed obvious. Lots of hiding places, no luck. Second visit I found that GZ was about 100' away from where I thought and in the middle of the street. This was closer to where an archived cache referenced was placed but nothing seemed likely there either. That seemed worth a second DNF. Two months and several DNF postings and still no finds and the CO has not logged in since hiding. Next attempt will probably be a NM rather than a DNF. Assuming I don't find it of course.

 

I have another where the hint is tallest tree but GZ appears to be right on a grave with a tree next to it. That tree isn't even the tallest one in that row and nothing close seemed to fit it. Second trip I gave up and went by the clue. I found a tree closer to being the tallest but 100' away from GZ. It did have a hole that would make a great hiding spot. It was empty, however, and a second DNF posted. CO has a history of not responding to NM postings (one for over 3 years before being archived by a reviewer). I don't see a reason to try this one again.

 

I've had a few others that I haven't found twice but didn't see any reason for a second DNF but those have been just a casual drop by and a cursory look from a little farther away to see if something strikes me that didn't close up. Nothing worth mentioning and I sure wouldn't call that a search.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...