DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

For all your general chit chat, caching or not.
User avatar
pjmpjm
6000 or more caches found
6000 or more caches found
Posts: 864
Joined: 09 April 10 12:35 am
Twitter: Booroobin
Location: Blue Mountains
Contact:

DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by pjmpjm » 27 January 11 9:53 pm

This is a topic that's been touched on many times in this forum, from various angles.

I've recently been discussing with geocaching friends the reality that many geocachers who don't find a cache, don't actually then log a DNF online. We all know that this happens, and for a number of reasons. (Those reasons might be a good topic for another thread!)

My question is: what do you think the percentage might be? For every DNF logged on a cache, how many times has it actually been searched for, but not found?

User avatar
caughtatwork
Posts: 16159
Joined: 17 May 04 12:11 pm
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by caughtatwork » 27 January 11 10:02 pm

Judging by some of the caches I've been to where the entire area has been ripped apart, but there's nary a DNF logged, I suggest "infinite".

User avatar
Yurt
4500 or more caches found
4500 or more caches found
Posts: 1509
Joined: 01 May 09 10:08 pm
Location: Northern Suburbs, Sydney

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Yurt » 27 January 11 10:35 pm

Yes I've noticed cachers who've claimed the FTF have often commented how the area looked disturbed but no DNF was ever logged.

I often drive by the parking spot for an infamous cache of mine and many times I've seen a car parked there with someone searching but no DNF or found log showed up later. That said, if someone has already DNFed a cache are they adding anything by logging more DNFs. Adding to the amusement of the 'watchers' maybe! :mrgreen:

daryllm123
Posts: 46
Joined: 04 August 10 9:46 pm
Location: Dandenong Nth

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by daryllm123 » 28 January 11 1:08 am

I think they should all be logged, as a cache hider if i get one dnf log in my email then it could just be someone not looking quite in the right spot but if i get multiple dnf's then my cache may have a problem so i will go and check on it, if no one logs a dnf then you dont even realise theres a problem till you get around to doing a maitenece run, therefore its in everyones interest to log all DNF's

User avatar
Just a cacher
Posts: 580
Joined: 03 July 10 3:01 am
Location: Northside, Canberra, Australia

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Just a cacher » 28 January 11 6:52 am

When I go caching with Black Bunny and Candy Cane 101, usually only one of us will log a DNF for a cache we didn't find. We figure that it looks really bad for the cache if it gets two or three DNFs in a row from just one search. We think it might put people off going out after that cache.

I usually log all the DNFs I can remember, unless one of the others has already logged it.

Wendy

User avatar
Happy Chappies
2000 or more caches found
2000 or more caches found
Posts: 506
Joined: 04 July 09 12:18 am
Location: Box Hill

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Happy Chappies » 28 January 11 9:42 am

I'd agree that I reckon more than 50% of DNFs don't get logged... maybe embarassment, laziness, lack of etiquette...

The only time I might not log a DNF is when I feel that I didn't really look, so in some ways didn't expect to 'find'... maybe I didn't bring the clue with me and it's a micro in a field full of grass plants somewhere (that was last night's experience!) and I'll be returning the next day, or maybe it was just too busy to even begin searching (although i'll often log that too), or I arrived at GZ to see the description and clue telling me it's a nano chucked aimlessly somewhere in a big mass of bushes :x and I can't be bothered searching or berating the owner who doesn't even come online anymore or check his other caches....

Having said that, those are the rare exceptions.... I enjoy writing and reading my DNF logs generally as much as my found!

User avatar
pprass
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 911
Joined: 18 December 03 11:52 pm
Location: Port Macquarie

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by pprass » 28 January 11 11:35 am

Hard question to answer accurately, but anecdotally we get a few "finally found it after # visits" (where # could be any number but, usually 2 or 3) and of course there were no DNF logs from them in the past.

Which I find odd - they don't log DNF's but then admit that they searched unsuccessfully in the past - so it is not a shame thing.

User avatar
Happy Chappies
2000 or more caches found
2000 or more caches found
Posts: 506
Joined: 04 July 09 12:18 am
Location: Box Hill

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Happy Chappies » 28 January 11 11:41 am

pprass wrote:Hard question to answer accurately, but anecdotally we get a few "finally found it after # visits" (where # could be any number but, usually 2 or 3) and of course there were no DNF logs from them in the past.

Which I find odd - they don't log DNF's but then admit that they searched unsuccessfully in the past - so it is not a shame thing.

I wonder if some people regard a 'DNF' as 'I give up' - which might explain the multiple attempts without DNF logs...

User avatar
McPhan
10000 or more caches found
10000 or more caches found
Posts: 725
Joined: 10 September 06 4:35 pm
Location: Rivett ACT

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by McPhan » 28 January 11 1:52 pm

I know a number of cachers (2 in fact :oops: ) that don't log DNFs if they believe the cache is still in situ AND they will be coming back to search again. Their justification is that they don't want to give the CO anything to worry about.

Philipp
1350 or more caches found
1350 or more caches found
Posts: 591
Joined: 24 January 10 3:08 pm
Twitter: derfuzzel
Location: Melbourne, VIC
Contact:

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Philipp » 28 January 11 3:39 pm

to the original question I'd reckon a ratio of 1 : 5 (so one logged DNF would be 5 real).

I do log every DNF and especially the stories where I messed up are the fun ones :mrgreen: It also means you can have several DNFs in a row if I tried more than once

User avatar
Zalgariath
5500 or more caches found
5500 or more caches found
Posts: 1749
Joined: 17 August 09 10:44 am
Location: Sydney, NSW

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Zalgariath » 28 January 11 10:19 pm

I log every DNF I have... even if there have been mulitples before and it is pretty obvious the cache is gone. It lets the owner know there is still interest in the cache (or the reviewer that the owner isnt keeping up maintenance!). I reckong 1:4 ish DNFs are probably logged.

canary
8000 or more caches found
8000 or more caches found
Posts: 123
Joined: 31 December 05 6:58 pm
Location: Hazelbrook, NSW

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by canary » 28 January 11 11:25 pm

I want to find every cache I look for. If takes me three or four goes that's what it takes, I don't care who knows.

But if I want to find it, it has to be there and if its not there, then it should be maintained or archived! But how can I show proof that I looked without the DNFs?

User avatar
Calypso62
Posts: 59
Joined: 19 June 09 1:38 pm
Location: Dural Sydney

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Calypso62 » 29 January 11 12:14 am

I would think that a number of cachers would see a DNF as admitting failure. Human beings generally don't like to fail at something they are trying to achieve. Hence, they don't like to advertise their failure through a DNF log.

As for me, I complete a log entry on every cache I visit regardless of the length of search or the outcome. As a cache owner, I like to know my cache has been visited and how people found their experience, good or bad, so I try to do the same for other cache owners. I suppose everybody plays the game their way!

User avatar
Teirae
50 or more caches found
50 or more caches found
Posts: 73
Joined: 17 August 10 7:56 pm
Location: The Rock, NSW
Contact:

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Teirae » 02 February 11 11:02 pm

I only log them if i have searched and searched and searched and really have am absolutly stumped.

there have been a few i have DNF but didnt log because 1. i dont think i gave it my all, and gave up, and do intend on going back another time (even though that is yet to happen...)

I worry that if i were to log a DNF the hider would have to go out and check it and its just my bad searching and i have wasted the hiders time.

User avatar
Richary
6500 or more caches found
6500 or more caches found
Posts: 4136
Joined: 04 February 04 10:55 pm
Location: Waitara, Sydney

Re: DNFs Logged vs. Actual DNFs

Post by Richary » 02 February 11 11:52 pm

As a hider one DNF will not trigger me to do a cache check, especially if it it is obvious the log is from a new cacher. So feel free to log your DNFs. Usually the cache gets found the week after in any case.

If a couple of people with a lot of finds under their belt log a DNF I will take it more seriously than someone with maybe 10 finds. Then I will go an do a check.

Post Reply