This Is What I Get For Logging Dnf's!

[+OzarksJim]

Hey everyone.

 

I am one of those really annoying cachers who strongly believes in posting DNF's. If I have 5 DNF's on one cache, I will post all 5 DNF's, and be quite detailed about it.

 

After logging a DNF this evening, I receive the following e-mail from a fellow cacher:

 

It seems that you are having a hard time finding Springfield Up / Springfield Down.  I would recommend email the cache owner as opposed to continuing to logging it as not found on the cache page.  Your logs are pretty long and take up a lot of room on the page.  As someone who is hoping to do this cache soon, it is bit discouraging to see your continued lengthy no-finds.  Good Luck finding it!

 

Here was my reply, and I hope I wasn't too much of a smart-aleck:

 

As someone who always believes in logging DNF's, I ALWAYS log DNF's. Just check the Groundspeak.com message boards and you will find others agree for various reasons (helps the cache owner, creates an interesting history of the cache, saves other people time, sometimes helps others find the cache, etc.).

 

Yes, my logs can be lengthy, but my current job title kind of goes along with that.

 

And as you will see on my logs, I have already contacted the cache owner for help. As a matter of fact, I had several DNF's on one of her other caches, and those DNF's helped find several "kinks" in the cache, since it had been modified recently. Additionally, those DNF's helped others find the cache and saved them several frustrating unsucessful trips (I guess I was the guinea pig). Also, I stay away from caches that have multiple DNF's in a row--saves me time too!

 

If the cache owner feels my logs are too long, he/she can delete them, which wouldn't bother me a bit (it's their cache page). If someone has one or a dozen DNF's on one of my own caches, I would want to know about it. And it wouldn't matter to me if it was logged as a DNF or an e-mail sent privately to me (just an opinion).

 

And finally, cachers can choose to either print or not print the logs when printing the cache pages.

 

The only time I wouldn't log a DNF is by request of the cache owner.

 

As you will also see in my log, I'm going to give up on this cache until someone else finds it (unless I get a wild hair and decide to try this one again, but I doubt it). But thanks for the tip

 

Good luck to you too!

 

Jim

 

So, my question to all of you is, should I just hold up on the DNF's for this one, assuming I go back and try this one again?

 

Thanks in advance for your suggestions.

 

Jim

[+ShadowAce]

Your logs and the owners cache. I see two people who might be involved here, but I am confused as to this third party you speak...

 

I think I understand this as someone who has never looked for the cache, does not own the cache and is not a friend of yours who believes they should dictate how and when you can log?

 

Sorry, I vote for the cache owner and the searcher..

 

If neither of you have an issue (an bully for you for having the guts to log a DNF) then I think this individual can take the proverbial long walk + short bridge thing..

 

And yes, this will start a flame war and yes people will whine and yes someone will have a 'valid' reason you cannot log the DNF. I can only submit MY opinion.

[Pantalaimon]

This is the first I've heard of someone complaining of a log that was TOO lengthy... and its not even their cache!

 

I say you are doing exactly what you should be doing, and then some.

 

Keep up the good work and may you never log another DNF (meaning that I hope you find them all, not that you should stop logging them!).

[+crash331]

Some people have complained about my DNFs too, but I just keep posting them.

[+Doggiewoggie]

God bless you for logging your DNF's. It's really none of the third person's business (isn't that weird? someone trying to curtail the length of your logs? talk about control freak)--this is between you and the owner of the cache. You did the right thing. And as far as the lengthy log is concerned, I'd rather have someone be thorough than not.

[+OzarksJim]

Your logs and the owners cache. I see two people who might be involved here, but I am confused as to this third party you speak...

 

I think I understand this as someone who has never looked for  the cache, does not own the cache and is not a friend of yours who believes they should dictate how and when you can log?

 

Sorry, I vote for the cache owner and the searcher..

 

If neither of you have an issue (an bully for you for having the guts to log a DNF) then I think this individual can take the proverbial long walk + short bridge thing..

 

And yes, this will start a flame war and yes people will whine and yes someone will have a 'valid' reason you cannot log the DNF. I can only submit MY opinion.

Yes, that is true that I do not know this person, they do not own the cache I don't believe they've looked for the cache. I was quite surprised when I received the e-mail. Had it been from the actual cache owner, I wouldn't have been surprised. She's always been very helpful in assisting me when I need more clues for her caches, or when I've found kinks that need to be worked out. I just hope I'm not too annoying!

 

As I stated previously, I always log DNF's, and I really don't care how embarrassing the DNF is. I recently posted 3 DNF's for the same cache that was found by a fellow geocacher's 7-year old daughter within a few minutes! Embarrassing, yes, but that's part of the fun of geocaching. You really can't take yourself too seriously.

 

Jim

[Tahosa and Sons]

A good repoire between an owner and a seeker is very beneficial for the continuance of this game (sport). As a hider I more than welcome comments about my mistakes or problems with the cache, then next one looking for it will be better off. An opionated EMail or log from another other cacher would be taken into due consideration and either answered or simply ignored and deleted.

 

Thanks for your fortitude to do a DNF its more than I've done on several occasions.

[+webscouter.]

Continue to log the DNF's.

 

I bet that cacher also digs through their neighbors garbage to make sure they are recycling.

 

Can't belive someone has enough time to worry about others logs.

[+briansnat]

Don't mind the busybody. I do the same as you and often my DNF logs are longer than my found its, usually because I spent more time looking for it and there is more to tell.

[+carleenp]

Just adding my vote to what Brian and others said.

[+KG7JE]

My DNFs are usually stories. Aren't we supposed to post "The Story"? Hey, there was one that I spent several hours over a few days and gave up -- only to have the next guy find it! So back I went for another half day.

 

But, the stories I told about searching for that cache. I guess the other guy doesn't like to read stories. All some folks want are:

 

TNLNSL. -- Jane

 

TNLNSL. -- Jim

 

TNLNSL. -- Sally

 

<<sigh>>

 

If that is all the story they can tell, they must (oh, Hi there Mr. Moderator. Yes sir. No sir. I'll just slip off and out the exit right there. Sure, no problem.)

[+Renegade Knight]

They were polite busybody's at least.

 

Your return email was fine, and even went into good detail about why DNF's are important.

 

You handled that well.

[+Sagefox]

So, my question to all of you is, should I just hold up on the DNF's for this one, assuming I go back and try this one again?

I too usually write a story about a no-find. If I think it might be humorus it might be a long story. If I just whimped out and gave up my log would be very short.

 

If I gave it very little effort I would write a short Note so as not to discourage future finders and thereby punish the cache for my being impatient or lazy.

 

I don't believe I would write five long stories though. That sounds like a bit much. One or two can contribute nicely to the persona of the cache but more than that would appear (from this limited picture) to be inappropriate. The fact that someone wrote a polite suggestion might substantiate this interpretation.

 

When a cache page is printed or downloaded to a PDA there can be important clues in the Find logs and a series of long DNF's can bump those logs off the page. But maybe your attempts were widely spaced and this is not a factor.

[+Divine]

They were polite busybody's at least.

 

Your return email was fine, and even went into good detail about why DNF's are important.

 

You handled that well.

What he said.

[+GeoRoo]

I find that the DNF's I read can often give me more information than the finds. I wish everyone would log the DNF's it would give a much clearer view of the cache. As a cache owner the DNF's are very valuable to indicate any problems. Recently on one of my caches there were several DNF's in a row and when I checked on it the cache had been moved and was smashed into the ground under some debris. I did a cache the other day that had 4 DNF's in a row and my guess is it's now missing, but you just never know. I have found caches that have multiple DNF's and have been very proud of my find, so it can go both ways. I'd say you handled it well and don't sweat what the guy said. I'll continue logging all of my DNF's. Those are on my watch list and if they are found will give me a good excuse to go back. I do use a PDA and a long set of posts will bump off the front page much faster, but it sounds like you give some detail. Many of the DNF's are hilarious, so it's all about having fun I say.

[Spike440]

I got an email from a cacher that couldn't find one that I had found.

 

In his log he wrote some not so nice things about the cache, and the local population.

 

I wrote an update to my log to keep other potential seekers from getting put off by his log.

 

He emailed me ranting about how I just got lucky and I must like mowing down woodland creatures, turtles to be exact, with my car.

 

Basically saying if he couldn't find it, it's too hard. Then he removed his log.

[+Robespierre]

Well, you didn't get a "find," but you get an "O" in citizenship! Every Every Every class has that one (sorry, but it is almost always a girl) whose job it is to organize and direct everyone else. Life!

[+necron]

The ONLY time I don't log a DNF is when I don't make it to the cache site (too dark, couldn't find my way...) I agree with you. Log them ALL, it helps the cacher no matter who complains. If there was a problem with this then GC.com would have taken care of it long ago, and the cache owner would do something after reading the logs. Thanks for helping us all find caches by logging the DNFs.

[+Gambrinus & Crew]

Keep logging your DNF's. I'm amazed that this third party even has an opinion regarding someone else's logs on a cache they don't own, regardless of their type. I find that quite often, the DNF logs are the most interesting to read anyway. Keep up the good work!

[+2Wheel'in]

Howdy - Amazing to see/hear just what sets some people off. I think you did a great job of explaining your DNF logging, and I love DNFs (no, not "getting" them, but reading them). I always post a DNF when I fail to find a cache...and on one cache in particular I've posted 4 or 5 DNFs before I finally found it, but so did many others. DNFs make great reading, make good sense, and should be considered necessary for all the reasons you listed - good job!

Regards,

Bill

[+Mopar]

Just adding my vote to what Brian and others said.

What Carleen says (which means I also agree with Brian, but Carleen's avatar is cuter then Brian's).

[BassoonPilot]

You handled it very well. Another option you have is to simply not log online at all, but believe me, people get on your back about that, too.

[+RainbowCache]

Just adding my vote to what Brian and others said.

What Carleen says (which means I also agree with Brian, but Carleen's avatar is cuter then Brian's).

Ditto!

[+briansnat]

Just adding my vote to what Brian and others said.

What Carleen says (which means I also agree with Brian, but Carleen's avatar is cuter then Brian's).

Ditto!

But I have nicer legs.

[+GrizzlyJohn]

I can see that most are in agreement with the OP.

 

I really can't disagree but there is only one point I would make about this. I don't know if it is the case for the cache you keep logging DNFs on so I am not saying this applies here, I just don't know.

 

But the one way I could see this being a problem is if the last five logs were all your DNFs. Then if a person is getting this from a PQ all they would see are those. I am not saying that is the case here only that is one way I could see this being a problem.

[+Mopar]

But the one way I could see this being a problem is if the last five logs were all your DNFs. Then if a person is getting this from a PQ all they would see are those. I am not saying that is the case here only that is one way I could see this being a problem.

I thought about that too, but is that really a problem? Ozarksjim seems to be a reasonably experienced cacher (congrats on 100 finds, btw!). Without knowing the cache in question I'm going to assume each one of his logs is a legit DNF. By that I mean he actually got to the spot and put a reasonable amount of time (as defined by the difficulty rating of the cache) into searching for it each time. If that's the case, are his 5 DNFs in the PQ any less valid then 5 different people? I don't know.

Maybe.

I've been skunked before on easy caches only to see a log on it the next day that says "My first cache ever! This was fun. My 5yr old daughter walked right up to it."

Sometimes a person gets tunnelvision and just can't see the cache.

Edited September 24, 2004 by Mopar

[+GrizzlyJohn]

I thought about that too, but is that really a problem? Ozarksjim seems to be a reasonably experienced cacher (congrats on 100 finds, btw!). Without knowing the cache in question I'm going to assume each one of his logs is a legit DNF. By that I mean he actually got to the spot and put a reasonable amount of time (as defined by the difficulty rating of the cache) into searching for it each time. If that's the case, are his 5 DNFs in the PQ any less valid then 5 different people? I don't know.

Maybe.

I've been skunked before on easy caches only to see a log on it the next day that says "My first cache ever! This was fun. My 5yr old daughter walked right up to it."

Sometimes a person gets tunnelvision and just can't see the cache.

Not at all questioning Ozarksjim's abilities to find a cache. There is a cache that is close to my home that I just can not find. People have found it before and after me but man I just can't seem to put my hands on it. I think I probably have tried at least five times.

 

I guess knowing that it has happened to me I would think about the tunnelvision you mentioned. If I saw five DNFs in a row by one person I think I would think that. But if I saw five DNFs in a row by five different people I would think something else. I don't mean to say they are any less valid they are all part of the story. But if all a person has is the PQ then that is the only part of the story they know but I don't know that it is a fair picture its only a snapshot.

 

Again Ozarksjim not questioning your ability. I just know that it can happen. It ain't fun.

Edited September 24, 2004 by GrizzlyJohn

[BassoonPilot]

Just adding my vote to what Brian and others said.

What Carleen says (which means I also agree with Brian, but Carleen's avatar is cuter then Brian's).

Ditto!

But I have nicer legs.

And you shave them more often?

 

Back to the serious conversation, I would rather read ten DNFs from a cacher who was determined to find a cache on his/her own than one "Found it" log where the log reads something like: "Couldn't find it after looking for 15 seconds, so I called XXX on the cell and s/he told me exactly where it was."

Edited September 24, 2004 by BassoonPilot

[+kbraband]

Yup, log each and every DNF that you have.

 

But please call them "DNFs" instead of "DNF's" because they're not possessive.

 

OK, I know that was picky. It was simply meant as a friendly observation from a word guy.

[CoyoteRed]

While I'm in total agreement that your DNFs should be logged and detailed logs are useful, I do have a couple of comments:

 

1- Multiple DNFs are useful as long as there is useful information. Folks relying on PQs can only get 5 logs. If the 5 logs they get are only from the same person and they only say "Yet, another attempt. Couldn't find it." That's counter productive.

 

I could probably go on to say that even one "Looked. Coudn't find it" log is pretty much useless. You aren't given any clue what might be wrong. Could have been one those "got called back into work on the way there" type of DNFs. It just takes up space in a PQ. I'm pretty sure most people would rather not be in there so a useful log could.

 

2- If you are so inclined to put multiple DNFs, especially short ones, (I know the OP puts long ones) you could consider putting them all in the same log. I've seen this on a particularly hard cache on a recent trip--sorry I can't remember which one--but the finders made multiple entries in the same log as they progressed through the multi. I thought that was brilliant.

 

This would be much more helpful to the folks with PQs as all of your information is in the same log leaving room for other people's logs in PQs.

 

While I understand you don't get a notification of log edits which is basically what is happening, as a cache owner I'm not too terribly concerned with multiple DNFs by the same person--I'm thinking they will get it eventually. Besides, knowing that your edited log will not be sent to the owner, if you have something to tell them you can shoot off an email.

 

I think this technique could be used for maintenance logs as well. I have one cache with multiple "It's still there!" logs. These take up room. In one case 3 of 5 logs are this type of log. From now on I'm going to re-use a previous log, especially if there isn't 3 logs between this new one the last maintenance log, to issue a maintenance statement. Heck, I might even stop doing maintenance logs altogether and do like some owners and put in the the description.

 

I'm sure there will be some who wouldn't like the above scheme, but I'd say it's a viable option worth considering.

 

Hope this helps.

[+Shawn&Holly]

Log the DNFs, some of my best stories are on the caches that I could not find. If I am there, I looked and could not find it, I log a DNF. I have caches that took multiple trips, I would get home log my DNF and then see a find log the same day, the next day, look on my next trip, not find it, then see a found it again before finding it myself. There is one that I cannot find that is there still, I just cannot find it, not many places to hide it and I will log another DNF on my next trip (hopefully a found it, both caches are 2 hours away), these are part of my caching history.

[+Team Tigger International]

Total Agreement here go ahead and log your DNF's , some of the best stories come from them .

Star of Team Tigger International

[thorin]

They were polite busybody's at least.

 

Your return email was fine, and even went into good detail about why DNF's are important.

 

You handled that well.

Agreed. To his/her credit atleast they were polite. However DNFs are important so don't worry about upsetting the 1 in a million because the rest of us appreciate them.

 

Thorin

[+CompuCash]

Yup, log each and every DNF that you have.

 

But please call them "DNFs" instead of "DNF's" because they're not possessive.

 

OK, I know that was picky. It was simply meant as a friendly observation from a word guy.

 

OnT - I log all my dnf's and appreciate when others log theirs also -

 

OfT - hmmm.... why not DNF's - it is a contraction of finishes? (another word guy)

[+geoSquid]

I wish more poeple would log DNFs. I like to learn what potential problems there might be before I go out. As a cache owner, it's the DNFs that tend to be most informative about issues that may not have been foreseen when I placed the cache.

 

I log DNF if I feel I've made an adequate search. Typically, I won't log multiple DNFs unless I encounter a new difficulty that may have contributed to a later DNF.

[+tirediron]

Ya done good! Keep it up!

[+Sagefox]

My take is that the issue here is not the number of DNFs but the length of the log entries. Certainly a DNF can be logged for each substaintial attempt.

 

It would seem to me that two lengthy good stories about the attempts would be interesting but after that it might be more appropriate to be brief. All five DNF's would be helpful to others if they each described separate specific search techniques or areas that did not work out.

[FreeFloat]

I wish more poeple would log DNFs. I like to learn what potential problems there might be before I go out. As a cache owner, it's the DNFs that tend to be most informative about issues that may not have been foreseen when I placed the cache.

 

I log DNF if I feel I've made an adequate search. Typically, I won't log multiple DNFs unless I encounter a new difficulty that may have contributed to a later DNF.

Everything he said.

 

I'm a cache owner too - and if no one logs DNFs, I have no way of knowing if people are even seeking my cache. Has it gone missing? Was there another reason they aren't finding it? (ie. the area suddenly inaccessible, construction, etc)

 

Sometimes, even a DNF is a reason to still maintain a cache instead of giving up and archiving it.

[+Team Sand Dollar]

First when I read this post I was in total agreement with logging the DNF. I still am bu I can see were someone with a PDA would not want multiple logs from the sme person all being DNF since all they have are the last 5 logs.

 

I to have poseted DNF multiple logs against a cahce (8 tries before I could find it). But in the future a will have olny one log that I edit the date and add more info as to not clutter up PDAs.

 

The only proble I see in this approach is that the owner may not get messages on edit. So maybe a new log with previous info and then deleting the previous logs would be the way to go.

 

But in any approach always post the DNF because it will alway help the hider and future finders.

 

Team Sand Dollar

[+GreyingJay]

I'll log DNF's, but probably not multiple ones unless I think there's information to be added in the second, third, etc. DNF's. Luckily it's never come to that, I've never had to go back to a cache more than twice. Of course, I've only tackled easier ones so far.

 

I would post a DNF if I was earnestly trying to find a cache, got to the spot, looked and looked, and gave up. The very first cache I tried to find, I was looking for the second waypoint in a multi, and I didn't even know what I was looking for, or how accurate my GPSr would be. I posted a DNF, but I haven't gone back to look again. If I still can't find the waypoint, I don't think I'll post a "argh, still can't find it" log, but I think if I made another two or more attempts, with no luck, I'd start thinking about posting "OK, I've been out here 3/4/5 times now, and still can't find it. Is it even still there?"

 

It depends on circumstance, too. I think I'd only post a DNF if I truly searched and gave up -- not if I had to abort the search for other reasons. The second cache I went to, I got within 100 feet before I realized I had taken a VERY wrong trail. I could have bushwhacked, but it was dense, I was wearing shorts, and I decided to give up and try again another time. No DNF.

 

The other night I set out in the early evening and searched an area till it got too dark to look. Didn't have much of a light with me, don't like night caching alone anyway, so I went home and tackled it again first thing the next morning. I didn't post a DNF but when I did post the "Found" log I mentioned how I'd found it over a series of two trips.

[+fly46]

The ONLY time I don't log a DNF is when I don't make it to the cache site (too dark, couldn't find my way...) I agree with you. Log them ALL, it helps the cacher no matter who complains. If there was a problem with this then GC.com would have taken care of it long ago, and the cache owner would do something after reading the logs. Thanks for helping us all find caches by logging the DNFs.

Hey, wait a minute... Some of those logs are important too..

 

Obviously, I'm a moron and got off at the wrong freeway exit isn't important to the cache, but saying something like "The road I needed is closed this week for a carnival" is helpful so other people don't go out and get upset, too.

 

 

Personally, I log one DNF per cache.

If I go back and still can't find it and nothing substantial has changed, then I won't make another log. On the other hand, if I go and the trail has been blocked off or it's now flooded six feet where i'm looking, I'll probably make another log.

 

I feel your pain on the DNF thing.

There's one cache in Ashtabula, Ohio that I've tried to find three times. I went out looking with my mother, no luck, went out by myself, no luck, went and used it for a poker run and went looking for it, no luck.

I'm going home for christmas, and I'll find it in december or else. Still, I think I only have one DNF log on it since not much changed in the meantime.

[Pipanella]

I've never had to log more than one DNF for a particular cache, but if I couldn't find it two times (or three or four), I'd log a DNF for each time, and tell what I did to try to find it. When I'm heading out to look for caches, I read ALL the logs, and as someone already said, sometimes the DNFs (I'm a word person, too ) prove to be more valuable than the find logs.

 

I wouldn't worry about it, but it shows what a concerned person you are. I hope you find it the next time!

[+Team Perks]

I would love to see the people in my area be even half as faithful about logging their DNF's as you are. Keep logging 'em, and don't worry about anyone who thinks you shouldn't (to be honest, that's the first I've heard of someone complaining about your posting DNF's).

 

That said, I think the person who emailed you was well-intentioned...and your reply was equally thoughtful. I can't say I'd have been nearly as collegial in my response.

 

As far as relying on PQ's, I use them far more than I look up cache information on the actual website, since it's just easier for me to do it that way. I use GSAK religiously to plot out my routes. If I see a cache with 5 consecutive DNF's from the same person, I'll either 1) skip the cache or 2) look up the cache page before I leave my computer. Neither of those, to me, are major inconveniences.

[+OzarksJim]

Thanks very much for all of your responses! I really do appreciate your support and kind words.

 

I am considering making my logs shorter, but I feel that the amount of time and effort I spent searching for a cache is directly proportional to the amount of detail I include in my logs.

 

I forgot to include this in my original post, but the cache the person who e-mailed me was referring to is this one:

 

Springfield Up/Springfield Down

 

This is one of those caches that I REALLY want to find, because it's the last one I haven't found within the Springfield MO city limits, as well as the closest one to my house.

 

And now the cache hider has sent me some more hints to help me find the cache. Ooh, the temptation...

 

Thanks again, everybody. You guys are great.

 

Jim

[+Kealia]

Thanks very much for all of your responses! I really do appreciate your support and kind words.

 

I am considering making my logs shorter, but I feel that the amount of time and effort I spent searching for a cache is directly proportional to the amount of detail I include in my logs.

 

I forgot to include this in my original post, but the cache the person who e-mailed me was referring to is this one:

 

Springfield Up/Springfield Down

 

This is one of those caches that I REALLY want to find, because it's the last one I haven't found within the Springfield MO city limits, as well as the closest one to my house.

 

And now the cache hider has sent me some more hints to help me find the cache. Ooh, the temptation...

 

Thanks again, everybody. You guys are great.

 

Jim

Could you please make your posts here shorter as well? They take up a lot of space when I am trying to read the entire thread and don't like having to expend the energy to scroll down the page more than I have to.

 

[+GrizzlyJohn]

Could you please make your posts here shorter as well? They take up a lot of space when I am trying to read the entire thread and don't like having to expend the energy to scroll down the page more than I have to.

 

dadgum you! You just made my Jack and Coke come out of my nose.

 

[+GeoRoo]

I almost lost my diet coke too! ....Looking at your logs and the cache owner saying his cache is low priority and then a month later he posts that the finale has been stolen again and he's replaced it!.....Come on. I'd be a little ticked to say the least that I spent that much time looking for it and find out it's gone. I'm fairly new to cache hiding, but I think there is a certain responsibility as a cache owner. I don't know what a resonable time frame is, but more than a week seems too long to me. I would at least disable it until I had a chance to check on it. I've had several DNF's that drove me nuts, so I know the frustration. One that I pulled out the metal detector and went back at night time and still couldn't find it. 2 days later I went back with a clear mind and it took me 30 seconds to find it!.....It was in an area that I had looked in a number of times and even dug up several old beer cans that were only 12 inches away from the ammo box. I think I'd wait till someone found it before I'd waste anymore time. Good luck.

[+Boot Group]

I also believe in posting our DNF'S. We've logged several over this past summer. For one of our DNF's, we found it the second time using a picture hint from the cache page.

 

There are two other caches that we have currently posted two DNF's. It has been a positive experience for us. Once we posted a DNF the second time, our friendly local cachers showed up in my e-mail for days with encouragement and support. The owner of one of the caches that we didn't find sent me their cell phone number, and told me to feel free to call if we are stuck for a third time. Another cacher sent some pictures near one of the caches as a hint. A third cacher offered to meet us at the parking area, and join us while we try the third time. We haven't been back yet, because we are still adjusting to the back-to-school schedule. We plan to meet up with the cacher who offered to help us soon because we always enjoy meeting fellow cachers.

 

So, forget about your negative experience and keep on posting your DNF'S!

[+drat19]

Some of the best logs come on DNFs, if you don't take yourself too seriously. Here are 2 of my recent ones (several log entries on each one). At the time of each search I wasn't exactly having fun, but I figured I might as well make the logs fun in return.

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...&log=y&decrypt=

 

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cache_detai...&log=y&decrypt=

 

-Dave R.

[+katguy]

My thoughts: Each time I hunt a cache, I am adding to its history. If I go out 4 times, each of those visits is part of the story of that cache, and I feel that is part of my obligation to the hider - to let him/her share in my experience at their hide. Otherwise, on that fourth visit I deny the hider the opportunity to cheer with me that I persevered though multiple non-finds and finally found it, or, if it comes out DNF as well, the chance to shake their head and say "what a loser, can't he figure out that it's right under that obvious pile of bark?" or pat themselves on the back for a cache well hidden.