When to log a DNF?

SUBYDAZZ · Post by **SUBYDAZZ** » 15 October 07 9:53 am

I have noticed that some cachers often log a DNF when they do not have time to look for a cache, or there are muggles around. What are everyone's thoughts on this?

Mine would be that a DNF should be logged when a good search has been executed and the cache hasn't been found. I guess for the people that look at the stats it can look like the cache was more difficult to find than it may be if they only look at numbers of finds vs DNFs for a cache.

You can always log a note if you don't have time to search or something IMHO.

ian-and-penny · Post by **ian-and-penny** » 15 October 07 10:23 am

A DNF should be logged if you have searched long and hard, and you really consider that the cache may have gone missing, or that you think you could possibly be looking in the wrong place.

If you could not find the cache because you haven't had time or because of muggles, then you really haven't looked.

I (and probably other cache owners) use DNF's as a trigger for additional cache maintenance.

Edited to include additional reasons for DNF, as suggested by Riblit

stevenwill · Post by **stevenwill** » 15 October 07 10:31 am

Hi mate,

I feel that if you went for the cache and it is available you should log it. This not only makes fun reading for the owner of the cache, but if cachers look at the logs it can give an indication of the time required for this cache or dangers present at the site.
For example I recently completed a cache were one of the cachers had logged that there was a resident snake at the GZ. Thank goodness he did because I nearly stepped on him and I was looking out for him.

If I did not know of him it is very likely I would have stepped on him as he was not particularly quick to move off! I still did not find the cache as it was on the other side of the river, but logged it to remind people that the snake is in the vicinity.

If people only log finds it kinda takes the fun out of the logs. We all get some DNFs why not log them?

Just my thoughts

Steve

riblit · Post by **riblit** » 15 October 07 10:32 am

ian-and-penny wrote:A DNF should be logged if you have searched long and hard, and you really consider that the cache may have gone missing.

Why should one consider the cache to be missing? A DNF is a Did Not Find.
not 'I think the cache is missing' - That's a subject for a maintenance note.

Sometimes caches are not found because the searcher is looking where the cache isn't.

SUBYDAZZ · Post by **SUBYDAZZ** » 15 October 07 10:35 am

stevenwill wrote:Hi mate,

I feel that if you went for the cache and it is available you should log it. This not only makes fun reading for the owner of the cache, but if cachers look at the logs it can give an indication of the time required for this cache or dangers present at the site.
For example I recently completed a cache were one of the cachers had logged that there was a resident snake at the GZ. Thank goodness he did because I nearly stepped on him and I was looking out for him. If I did not know of him it is very likely I would have stepped on him as he was not particularly quick to move off! I still did not find the cache as it was on the other side of the river, but logged it to remind people that the snake is in the vicinity.

If people only log finds it kinda takes the fun out of the logs. We all get some DNFs why not log them?

Just my thoughts

Steve

I'm not suggesting only logging finds, but you can post notes, rather than DNFs. Also for those that care (and not everyone does) DNFs get logged against your profile and the caches. Notes do not.

I too use DNFs as a trigger to perform maintenance, though I know now that it is rarely required (at least with my caches).

ian-and-penny · Post by **ian-and-penny** » 15 October 07 10:36 am

riblit wrote:
ian-and-penny wrote:A DNF should be logged if you have searched long and hard, and you really consider that the cache may have gone missing.

Why should one consider the cache to be missing? A DNF is a Did Not Find.
not 'I think the cache is missing' - That's a subject for a maintenance note.

Sometimes caches are not found because the searcher is looking where the cache isn't.

Yep, agreed.

(I was trying to suggest that if you haven't looked then don't log a DNF)

ian-and-penny · Post by **ian-and-penny** » 15 October 07 10:52 am

stevenwill wrote: If people only log finds it kinda takes the fun out of the logs. We all get some DNFs why not log them?

Just my thoughts

Steve

Yep sure we all get some DNFs, but if you haven't searched for the cache because of some of the reasons the OP said, (lack of time or muggle activity) then you really haven't looked, so maybe a DNF is not the most approriate log.

SUBYDAZZ · Post by **SUBYDAZZ** » 15 October 07 10:57 am

FYI my log stats as of today are:

353 Found
58 DNF
23 FTF

Gosh knows how many 'note' logs, but it's be a lot.

penguin · Post by **penguin** » 15 October 07 11:20 am

Hey guys,

I didn't vote in the poll, as I feel that the presence of muggles or the sufficiency/insufficiency of time are irrelevant when logging a DNF. I think the determining factor is whether you have actually started searching at GZ for the cache.

If you actually looked for the cache at GZ and you didn't find it, regardless of however long you looked, then, in my opinion, it is a DNF. If you ran out of time, then that is an issue of your own time management, and thus a DNF.

If you get interrupted by muggles and cannot start your search of GZ, then I feel that a DNF is not appropriate; but if you have started the search, then I believe that you should be honest with yourself and log a DNF.

I have, however considered whether or not to log a few recent DNFs as notes, as they were all actually not at the listed coordinates. In these cases, I would consider not logging DNFs as appropriate given that one can not reasonably be expected to find something when the wrong coordinates are posted. In the end, I was happy to log as DNFs. I should point out that at the time of logging, I was only aware that two of these caches had the incorrect coordinates posted.

My two cents worth really...

Geodes · Post by **Geodes** » 15 October 07 12:40 pm

There can be a variety of reasons for choosing whether to log a dnf or not (I voted 'No') but, IMO, the overriding consideration is what sort of information it will provide to future searchers (and the cache owner). i.e if it's a dnf due to muggle occupancy of GZ and this has already been noted as a problem for the cache, then another dnf is just noise.
<P>Knowledge of other cacher's logging habits can be invaluable when planning a caching itinerary - a dnf from those that extensively phone-a-friend will usually indicate a missing cache, while a dnf from a team with <10 finds should not be taken too seriously

Mloe · Post by **Mloe** » 15 October 07 3:07 pm

I think if I went looking for a cache there are only really two possible outcomes, I found it or I didn't. I guess the only tricky bit is when to concider the looking to have started... Hopefully the cachers that follow might find my comments informative, or at the very least the cacher owner find my ineptness amusing. :)

calumphing_four · Post by **calumphing_four** » 15 October 07 5:35 pm

Mloe wrote:I think if I went looking for a cache there are only really two possible outcomes, I found it or I didn't. I guess the only tricky bit is when to concider the looking to have started... Hopefully the cachers that follow might find my comments informative, or at the very least the cacher owner find my ineptness amusing.

Recently wasn't sure whether to log a DNF so posted a note. Could easily see it, but couldn't get it.

<br>
If the cache involved finding a tool as well (e.g
Pump it up then I would log a DNF even if I had the cache.<br>
So perhaps there is a third outcmoe - could find it, but couldn't log it.

<br>
Cheers

calumphing_four · Post by **calumphing_four** » 15 October 07 5:41 pm

BTW how long is insufficient time? With our track record we usually need a few hours

to find a cache, so anything shorter must therefore be insufficient

stevenwill · Post by **stevenwill** » 16 October 07 7:10 am

I still feel if you stop the car and start looking if you do not fing the cache then a DNF is required! Else you are choosing what to log on how you feel. If there are muggles wait a while, get inventive or come back in an hour or so. I have tried three times on one cache in a single day before final success, if you give up and do not come back as there are muggles in the area, you DNF it, log it as such. If maintenance is required log it as such - if it is definitly not there I will also send the owner a direct e-mail with more info on where I looked so that he can better decide if I was looking in the right places!

Any way thats just the way I log it, feels fair and more reasonable than choosing if I will log a DNF or not because of other reasons, like muggles, too lazy to work out the time required, could not work out the puzzle or just incorrectly calculated the GZ in a multi.

Steve

Geocaching Australia

When to log a DNF?

Should a DNF be logged if insufficient time to search or muggles are present?

When to log a DNF?