New Field in Log Alert Emails (DNF)

[+LeGrand]

As a cache owner, When I get an email notification, for a DNF log specifically, I always end up checking the user's profile to see how many finds the user has to see how seriously I should take the DNF log

 

For example if a user with 3,000 finds says my cache isn't there or that they couldn't find it I will go check on it, but if a user with 6 finds logs a DNF (and there is no pattern of previous DNFs) I would probably wait and see what the next cacher logs before going to check it. 

 

If the log notification email would list the user's number of finds under/beside their username in the alert email (just like the log section of the cache page does) it would save me some time and avoid my having to pull up their profile or pull up the cache page and look up the log there to see their find count. 

 

Just an idea. 

 

 

[+Max and 99]

27 minutes ago, LeGrand said:

As a cache owner, When I get an email notification, for a DNF log specifically, I always end up checking the user's profile to see how many finds the user has to see how seriously I should take the DNF log

 

For example if a user with 3,000 finds says my cache isn't there or that they couldn't find it I will go check on it, but if a user with 6 finds logs a DNF (and there is no pattern of previous DNFs) I would probably wait and see what the next cacher logs before going to check it. 

 

If the log notification email would list the user's number of finds under/beside their username in the alert email (just like the log section of the cache page does) it would save me some time and avoid my having to pull up their profile or pull up the cache page and look up the log there to see their find count. 

 

Just an idea. 

 

 

How will this idea fit in with CHS notifications?  Does the algorithm consider the find count of those who log DNFs? Just something to consider.

[+niraD]

Some people with a LOT of finds follow a 5-minute rule: If they don't find it within 5 minutes, they log a DNF and move on. It doesn't matter what the rated difficulty of the cache is. After 5 minutes, they log a DNF and move on.

[+hal-an-tow]

13 hours ago, LeGrand said:

As a cache owner, When I get an email notification, for a DNF log specifically, I always end up checking the user's profile to see how many finds the user has to see how seriously I should take the DNF log

 

For example if a user with 3,000 finds says my cache isn't there or that they couldn't find it I will go check on it, but if a user with 6 finds logs a DNF (and there is no pattern of previous DNFs) I would probably wait and see what the next cacher logs before going to check it. 

 

If the log notification email would list the user's number of finds under/beside their username in the alert email (just like the log section of the cache page does) it would save me some time and avoid my having to pull up their profile or pull up the cache page and look up the log there to see their find count. 

 

Just an idea.

An interesting idea ,

I have a similar habit of checking out DNFers experience level before thinking a cache of mine might be in need of attention after one DNF. Actually for years now the first line of my found it logs gives my find number for the cache I'm logging, It's a straightforward thing to set up in GSAK , maybe I should extend it to my own ,many DNF logs too !  I'd imagine if GSAK can do it, Groundspeak could include the information with no difficulty.

 

Mind you,I'm also really good at DNFing even very easy caches  and despite having a good few finds under my belt hesitate to suggest a cache is missing unless it has several DNFs before mine ...

13 hours ago, niraD said:

Some people with a LOT of finds follow a 5-minute rule: If they don't find it within 5 minutes, they log a DNF and move on. It doesn't matter what the rated difficulty of the cache is. After 5 minutes, they log a DNF and move on.

 Yes, I've seen logs like that, copy/paste DNF saying they 'gave it their maximum 3 minutes (or whatever), them moved on' from a numbers cacher, but at least when you open and read those emailed logs their content makes them easy to discount from your assessment of what may need to be near the top of the maintenance list.. So as long as the DNFer explains their custom in the log text, that shouldn't be a problem.

13 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

How will this idea fit in with CHS notifications?  Does the algorithm consider the find count of those who log DNFs? Just something to consider.

I don't think we have been given that information about the mysterious algorithm, but I'd hazard a guess it uses D/T , time since last find, absence of O.M. logs and number of DNF / NM logs ,  probably not the find count or years of experience of the cachers posting those logs. I don't think it is that clever.

[+cerberus1]

You didn't mention D/T on these hides.   

Low D/T caches are simple, easy to find hides, and I don't feel there's any difference based on a "find count". ..

 

Similar to niraD, we see high-count cachers looking quickly, and either there's no mention,  log DNF or leave a throwdown. 

That next, "newb, low-count logger" may be the one that actually shows that you need to get out and check. 

 - "Looking for a small lock n lock, found a film can with one sig on the log."      They don't have those bad habits - yet.

[+cerberus1]

14 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

How will this idea fit in with CHS notifications?  Does the algorithm consider the find count of those who log DNFs? Just something to consider.

Good point. 

What number of  "low find count"  cachers it would take before the OP was to check,  if no  "high-count"  cacher shows for weeks/months ?

IIRC, the CHS goes by D/T, and if no action on it,  it's viewed by a Reviewer, and  they're the ones who consider the "experience" of the cacher placing DNF. 

It'd seem kind of silly (to me) to let one's reputation go that far based on "find count"...

[+CAVinoGal]

20 hours ago, LeGrand said:

If the log notification email would list the user's number of finds under/beside their username in the alert email (just like the log section of the cache page does) it would save me some time and avoid my having to pull up their profile or pull up the cache page and look up the log there to see their find count. 

 

Just an idea. 

And an interesting one, too.  You're right, if I don't recognize the cacher's name, or if their log doesn't give me an idea of how thoroughly they searched or where they searched, I will check their profile to see how many finds they have, to give me at least an indication of how experienced they are.

 

I try to give the CO some idea of how long I searched, and how throughly GZ was gone over, and how many people were searching - me, by myself, for 10 minutes, or a group of 4 of us that spent 30 minutes and still came up empty!  I'll also state if it looks likes there's been recent (construction/landscape work/flooding/fire/etc) or if I think it likely that I just missed it.  Or if I stopped looking once I realized all the poison oak covering potential hiding spots.  Regardless the # of my finds, my logs should give the CO an idea of whether he/she needs to make a welfare check.  I know not everyone writes helpful logs - and then other info is needed to tell if the CO needs to check or if he/she should wait for more logs.

[+barefootjeff]

33 minutes ago, CAVinoGal said:

And an interesting one, too.  You're right, if I don't recognize the cacher's name, or if their log doesn't give me an idea of how thoroughly they searched or where they searched, I will check their profile to see how many finds they have, to give me at least an indication of how experienced they are.

 

I try to give the CO some idea of how long I searched, and how throughly GZ was gone over, and how many people were searching - me, by myself, for 10 minutes, or a group of 4 of us that spent 30 minutes and still came up empty!  I'll also state if it looks likes there's been recent (construction/landscape work/flooding/fire/etc) or if I think it likely that I just missed it.  Or if I stopped looking once I realized all the poison oak covering potential hiding spots.  Regardless the # of my finds, my logs should give the CO an idea of whether he/she needs to make a welfare check.  I know not everyone writes helpful logs - and then other info is needed to tell if the CO needs to check or if he/she should wait for more logs.

 

With just over 1000 finds under my belt, I'm still about as inept at finding caches, especially urban micros, as I was when I first started, so a DNF from me usually just means I couldn't spot the obvious. I try to put as much detail as I can into my DNF logs, hopefully to convince the CO that they don't need to do a cache check, and, depending on the circumstances, will often include photos of where I'd been looking. Sometimes the CO will respond saying they can see the cache in one of my photos.

[+CAVinoGal]

On 10/14/2019 at 3:34 PM, barefootjeff said:

... depending on the circumstances, will often include photos of where I'd been looking. Sometimes the CO will respond saying they can see the cache in one of my photos.

 

If I include photos it's usually in a private note to the CO (I don't want to risk a spoiler) just in case the cache is in the photo, which is pretty funny when it happens, IMO!!

 

One cache in particular I remember, it was just after Hurricane Irma and I was in Florida visiting family.  I thought it had been in a fake sprinkler head that was in pieces at GZ - sent the CO pics of the pieces, and she said that wasn't it at all - I later went back and it was actually a bison tube on a piece of fishing wire hanging on a drainage grate - still in place even after all the storm and flooding - and the log inside was still dry!  So yeah, photos can definitely help a CO know if a visit is needed.

 

Back to the OP's suggestion of seeing the find count as part of the profile info in the email - yes, that would be a piece of information I would consider useful, and it shouldn't be hard for GS to add it to the email template.  Sometimes the log itself is all I need though, so if I need/want that additional piece of info (Find #), it's easy enough to find with one click.  If it doesn't happen, I'll get by!

Edited October 17, 2019 by CAVinoGal
clarification

[+baer2006]

I don't think the find count of a DNF logger is a goog metric to judge if the cache needs attention. I have a 5-digit number of finds, but also have just logged my DNF #781(!) last weekend. OTOH, many newbies search for much longer than "GC pros", because they know that they lack experience, and may therefore need more time to find a cache.

When someone logs a DNF on one of my hides, I try to guess from the content of the log and the difficulty of the hide, if I should take immediate action or not.

[+CAVinoGal]

4 hours ago, baer2006 said:

I don't think the find count of a DNF logger is a good metric to judge if the cache needs attention....When someone logs a DNF on one of my hides, I try to guess from the content of the log and the difficulty of the hide, if I should take immediate action or not.

I give the log content more weight than the # of finds, definitely - but sometimes there IS no content - or it's unhelpful.  Didn't find it.  A sad face emoticon.  No luck to day.  DNF. etc...  That's when I'll look at # of finds, and recent find logs, to see if I need to make a visit to GZ.  

 

# of finds would be another useful piece of information, easy to add, and would be interesting to see on Found logs as well. But as I said, if it doesn't happen, I can live with that too.