Jump to content

Dnf's: Do You Admit To Them By Posting Them?


brodiebunch
Followers 2

Recommended Posts

I have 73 DNFs. The way I look at it is that when I set out to find a cache there are two possibilities. I either find it or I don't. There are options for both scenarios and I choose the appropriate one for my log.

 

I took a snapshot of my DNF page, but it didn't come out very good:

 

32c78853-0a74-4f3a-b4fa-b80a9c6593a1.jpg

Edited by briansnat
Link to comment

I always post my DNF's. Matter of fact I had 7 over the weekend (1 definetly was missing, 1 was probably missing since several other experienced cachers couldn't find it, 1 possibly was missing, 1 I quit searching for due to muggles, and 3 I didn't look that hard for).

 

I post them for several reasons. I post my finds so why not the DNFs?

 

It's also very important so cache owners can be alerted of potential problems with their caches.

 

southdeltan

Link to comment

Well, my first cache I finally found on my third trip there. First time I miscalculated the angle of the multicache, second time entered the coordinates in the wrong form (hh:mm:ss instead of hh:mm.mm)

 

If I entered a DNF every time I couldn't find one, I'd have at least 1 DNF per cache I've visited, and 2 DNF's on two of them...

 

I'll get the hang of it eventually.

Link to comment

Guess it depends. If I feel that I have made an honest effort to locate the cache and I simply can not find it, I will log a DNF. If I made a half hearted attempt and then gave up to look for another cache, no, I most likely won't post. I've looked for caches and planned to log a no find only to get home and find others had found it the same day. This tells me I just didn't look hard enough.

 

We all play the game our own way.

 

Wulf

Link to comment
Never have.  Never will.

If I think that there's a problem with the cache, I'll e-mail the owner.

And meanwhile the next searchers are never alerted if there is a problem are are likely to go and try and find something that isn't there.

 

This is exactly WHY you should.

Edited by Kealia
Link to comment

If I look and don't find it, I log it as a DNF.

 

If it is later verified to be missing, I don't change a thing. I STILL did not find it. If it were shameful to not find a cache, I might reconsider that, but since it's just a history of my experience, I don't change the history.

 

DNF=I did not find it.

 

It seems like such a simple concept. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Never have.  Never will.

If I think that there's a problem with the cache, I'll e-mail the owner.

And meanwhile the next searchers are never alerted if there is a problem are are likely to go and try and find something that isn't there.

 

This is exactly WHY you should.

And quite often someone has found it before I even get home to log it.

If others do it the same way that I do, the owner will get several e-mails with information about the search that could be a spoiler in a log.

Edited by RichardMoore
Link to comment
Never have.  Never will.

Interesting that one of your logs begins with,

 

"I had heard about a problem with this cache, so I read the logs before heading out."

 

Jamie

And got the information from a find, not a DNF.

That may be true but that doesn't say that emailing the owner will result in the owner checking on the cache in a timely manner (or at all). A DNF (or a series of DNF's) can alert potential hunters of problems with a cache. This can be valueable info (especially for people who have travelled a great distance to hunt for a cache).

 

Aside from that - if you haven't found the cache how do you decide if something may be wrong with it? What if you just can't find it?

 

I'm also with JamieZ - I post my DNF's if for nothing else the cache's history. DNF logs can be much more interesting than find logs.

 

I also think it's important to let the cache hider know that somebody looked for the cache. If people didn't post DNF's not only does it not alert the hider and potential hunters of a problem but it doesn't let the hider know that somebody looked for the cache. I think that's important as well.

 

southdeltan

Link to comment
I also think it's important to let the cache hider know that somebody looked for the cache. If people didn't post DNF's not only does it not alert the hider and potential hunters of a problem but it doesn't let the hider know that somebody looked for the cache. I think that's important as well.

 

southdeltan

I don't.

Link to comment
Never have. Never will.

If I think that there's a problem with the cache, I'll e-mail the owner.

And why shouldn't the next seeker also have the info that something may be wrong with the cache?

 

I always log my activity - found, not found or notes for revisits/working on it. There's been at least one case where I hadn't put a note on a cache that I was working the multi-puzzle for and the hider archived it because it had run it's course and nobody was looking for it any more.

Link to comment

Yes I log my DNF's as they can be usefull for someone else that is going to attempt the cache, or that has already. It can be frustrating when others are finding a cache that you aren't even when you know (or think) you have looked at everything.

 

They can also alert the cache owner to a potential problem if there are a series of them on a cache. It wouldn't be fun if every time you went out you found the cache right off the bat, after a while that gets a bit boring. Knowing that you've put in all the thought you could to find a location is what it's about

Link to comment

Wow.

 

Just checked our DNF's and found we have 79 of them.

 

And whats the problem with logging them anyway?

 

Short and to the point: Afraid someone will think your a loser or something? Sounds like an ego problem to me.

 

When you go fishing, do you catch all the fish in the pond? Haven't you ever had one get away?

 

Just because someone outsmarted you on placing a cache doesn't make you stupid.

 

What would be the fun of finding everything you looked for anyway?

 

That's part of the game. Learning to see things outside of the box, so to speak.

The key word here is "learn".

 

Deal with it.

 

logscaler.

Link to comment
Short and to the point: Afraid someone will think your a loser or something? Sounds like an ego problem to me.

 

When you go fishing, do you catch all the fish in the pond? Haven't you ever had one get away?

 

Just because someone outsmarted you on placing a cache doesn't make you stupid.

 

What would be the fun of finding everything you looked for anyway?

 

That's part of the game. Learning to see things outside of the box, so to speak.

The key word here is "learn".

 

Deal with it.

 

logscaler.

I don't agree with any of this.

 

Deal with it.

Link to comment
I post all of my DNFs, but if it's determined that the cache was indeed missing, then I change that DNF to a note, once the owner has verified it is missing.  Can't find what isn't there!

Having the owner verify that the cache was missing doesn't change the fact that you didn't find it.

But the DNF has served it's supposed purpose, what does it matter if it's a note or a DNF? Either way it is still part of the cache's history.

Link to comment

Of course I post DNFs. If I didn't it doesn't change the fact that I didn't find the cache. :anibad: It's cool to scroll back a year or two in my geocaching history and cast my mind back to the caching trips I made back then. If I hadn't logged my DNFs back then, I'd have much fewer adventures to reminisce about.

Link to comment

Hey I never noticed that feature for seeing how many dnfs. I guessed I had probaby 400 DNFs, but the total is actually 312 career DNFs.

 

So my success rate...unweighed...is abouit 85% Now if you do statistical analysis...taking account of DNFs per cache, the rate goes up as I have several caches with 3 DNFs or more before I actually found them. Didn't do the math, but probably closer to 90%.

Link to comment
If I get out of the car and start walking toward the cache, I usually log a DNF. In the past, my criteria was if I made a concerted effort to search, but nowadays, if I'm out of the car and didn't put my hands on the logbooks, it's a DNF.

According to the reasons that others have given for logging DNF's, wouldn't this be misrepresenting the condition of the cache? Other searchers would see your DNF and, not knowing that you didn't make a serious attempt to find the cache, not even bother searching. The owner would also think that there is a problem.

I'm sure that the thinking would be "If Markwell, with all of his experience, couldn't find it, it must not be there." I don't mean that facetiously. You're DNF would carry more weight than one by someone with three finds.

And yes, it's just one DNF, but what if a couple others happened to do the same thing?

Link to comment
According to the reasons that others have given for logging DNF's, wouldn't this be misrepresenting the condition of the cache?

 

No, it means I went to look for the cache and didn't find it.

But Markwell didn't even look.

 

Quote:

"If I get out of the car and start walking toward the cache, I usually log a DNF."

Link to comment
According to the reasons that others have given for logging DNF's, wouldn't this be misrepresenting the condition of the cache?

 

No, it means I went to look for the cache and didn't find it.

But Markwell didn't even look.

 

Quote:

"If I get out of the car and start walking toward the cache, I usually log a DNF."

And he didn't find it, so its a DNF. I use the same criterion. If I find the cache its a "found it", if I didn't find a cache, it gets a "didn't find it".

Link to comment

RM,

 

I'm glad you've responded to this thread, because it's interesting to get the perspective of someone who doesn't do this. Although you haven't noted any reason why you've chosen this particular lifestyle.

 

Anyway, I more-or-less have the same criteria as Markwell. You can be sure that if Markwell or I get to the park, get out of the car headed to the cache and realize we've forgotten to wear our shoes, the DNF log will not read:

 

"Couldn't find it this time! Will have to come back later."

 

Rather, it will be a DNF log chiding ourselves for being dopey and anyone who cares can read the log to find out why we didn't find the cache.

 

When I go hunt for a cache, not only do I like to keep a record of that for myself, but as a cache owner, it makes me feel good when I know people are out hunting for my cache. Logging a DNF tells the owner that I was interested in finding their cache and made an effort to do so.

 

Jamie

Link to comment
According to the reasons that others have given for logging DNF's, wouldn't this be misrepresenting the condition of the cache?

 

No, it means I went to look for the cache and didn't find it.

But Markwell didn't even look.

 

Quote:

"If I get out of the car and start walking toward the cache, I usually log a DNF."

And he didn't find it, so its a DNF. I use the same criterion. If I find the cache its a "found it", if I didn't find a cache, it gets a "didn't find it".

I see, so we need another kind of log. "Found It", "Didn't Find It", "Didn't Even Look For It."

By the way, should I log a DNF on your caches? I was going to look for them but when I got in my van I realized that I didn't have enough gas to get me there.

Link to comment

I usually log my DNFs. I think there may be one or two I didn't, but those hunts were with other people who did log it, so it's not like the owner didn't know of potential problems. I think DNFs are part of my cache history, just like my finds. The DNF's are often more memorable and more interesting then some of the finds anyway. It's not the end of the world, or even proof positive the cache is missing, no matter how experienced you are. My last DNF was found the very next day by several different newbie cachers. Sometimes you find them, sometimes you don't. Geocaching would quickly get boring for me if every cache was just a matter of "walk up, read hint, go directly to cache, sign log, move on to the next". Give me a well-designed cache hunt, and I'll have fun, find it or not. Of course, give me a crappy hunt and add a DNF to that, and I'm not going to be a happy camper, but even that's part of the game. Ya never know.

DNFs also alert other cachers, the hider, and possibly even the land manager to potential problems with the cache. With all the negative attention caching has gotten lately from some authorities and land managers, it's important for cachers to stay on top of any problems. Just like you never know in advance what caches you are going to find, and what caches you won't, you also never know what cache problem will cause geocaching to be banned in another park system until the damage is done.

Link to comment
RM,

 

I'm glad you've responded to this thread, because it's interesting to get the perspective of someone who doesn't do this. Although you haven't noted any reason why you've chosen this particular lifestyle.

 

Anyway, I more-or-less have the same criteria as Markwell. You can be sure that if Markwell or I get to the park, get out of the car headed to the cache and realize we've forgotten to wear our shoes, the DNF log will not read:

 

"Couldn't find it this time! Will have to come back later."

 

Rather, it will be a DNF log chiding ourselves for being dopey and anyone who cares can read the log to find out why we didn't find the cache.

 

When I go hunt for a cache, not only do I like to keep a record of that for myself, but as a cache owner, it makes me feel good when I know people are out hunting for my cache. Logging a DNF tells the owner that I was interested in finding their cache and made an effort to do so.

 

Jamie

Thank you, Jamie.

 

Now let me throw another thought out there:

How many of your DNF's would have been served just as well, if not better, with a note?

Most of the reasons given for posting DNF's are to inform other searchers or the owner of a problem, or to add to the "cache history". Don't some of your DNF's indicate a problem that means little or nothing to other searchers? To use your example, how does you forgetting your shoes affect my finding the cache? As for the "cache history", a note would work just as well.

Link to comment
DNFs also alert other cachers, the hider, and possibly even the land manager to potential problems with the cache. With all the negative attention caching has gotten lately from some authorities and land managers, it's important for cachers to stay on top of any problems. Just like you never know in advance what caches you are going to find, and what caches you won't, you also never know what cache problem will cause geocaching to be banned in another park system until the damage is done.

To be slightly off-topic for a moment:

I would hope that any cachers who see a potential problem with a cache would indicate it in their "found" log, and contact the cache owner. A trail forming to the cache, especially if it's on a slope, could become an erosion problem. A cache owner may not realize that a schoolyard is not a good place to hide a cache, or that the public land that he hid the cache on is actually private property.

 

Sort of back on topic, by most reasons given, DNF's would indicate a present problem with the cache. "Found It" logs can indicate potential problems.

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...
Followers 2
×
×
  • Create New...