DNFs Due To Muggles

[+MysteryGuy1]

I know there's been some discussions on here about when people do/don't log their DNFs, but here's one aspect I have not seen covered. Do you typically log a DNF in cases where the presence of muggles prevents you from doing a thorough search? Or even any search at all? I only recently started logging DNFs, but I will only do so if I've looked in every place I could think of. If I only gave a half-hearted search to avoid looking suspicious, I will not log that. If I didn't even approach GZ because a muggle was parked 20 feet away, I won't log that either. How about you?

[+kunarion]

I know there's been some discussions on here about when people do/don't log their DNFs, but here's one aspect I have not seen covered. Do you typically log a DNF in cases where the presence of muggles prevents you from doing a thorough search? Or even any search at all? I only recently started logging DNFs, but I will only do so if I've looked in every place I could think of. If I only gave a half-hearted search to avoid looking suspicious, I will not log that. If I didn't even approach GZ because a muggle was parked 20 feet away, I won't log that either. How about you?

Of course I do. For my own reference, where I may review my previous logs to decide when or if I may try again, maybe on a different day of the week or different time. And to let others know what happened when I went there. I'd appreciate if they would do the same (I may have wasted a trip due to insufficient info on exactly how difficult it is). And on my own caches, knowing it's a hangout or a place where LEO takes breaks, helps me decide if I want to keep the cache there, and what info I might add to the cache description. Log it!

Edited June 7, 2017 by kunarion

[+terratin]

Yes, it's my caching history! and quite often, getting to a cache is worth a story in itself. I've even logged a DNF on an EarthCache this week because I started out answering the questions, then noticed a second waypoint on top of that hill. And I was too hungry to drag myself up

 

There is one reason for me to not log a DNF: if I walk/drive/cycle past gz and see that it's too muggly, and don't even stop. If I stop and look, or specifically hike to a certain location then it's a DNF.

[+redsox_mark]

I would log it, and it is good to log it.

You can log either a DNF or a Note. I tend to use DNF if I looked (even if gave up early due to muggles), and Note if I don't even look at all. But some like to log DNF if they pressed "go" on their device, even if they never reach the location. Don't worry too much about that, log whichever type you feel is best.

[+cerberus1]

If I gave even a "half-hearted" search and come up empty, I log a DNF, explaining it was a casual search in my log.

 

Rarely do those kinda caches anymore, but when an areas so busy with muggles that a search is awkward once there, I'll leave a note to say I was there but didn't even give it a perfunctory search .

Most times when it's ridiculously tough to search, I simply turn away. Those aren't fun for us anymore.

[+niraD]

If I search, but my search is limited by muggles (or anything else) and I don't find the cache, then I log a DNF.

 

If I don't reach GZ or don't search because of muggles (or anything else), then I sometimes log a DNS (Did Not Search) as a Note, assuming that there is a story to tell.

[+Viajero Perdido]

I'll post a Note rather than a DNF if I didn't even search. DNFs have consequences!

 

(I saw a reviewer send a CO up a mountain after a single DNF. It's been discussed elsewhere, but the effect is, don't DNF.)

Edited June 7, 2017 by Viajero Perdido

[+kunarion]

I'll post a Note rather than a DNF if I didn't even search. DNFs have consequences!

 

(I saw a reviewer send a CO up a mountain after a single DNF. It's been discussed elsewhere, but the effect is, don't DNF.)

I've seen those threads. But every cache I've seen archived (or even addressed by the CO and then not archived) due to DNF, needed it. I've never seen a false positive. They are that bad, I saw those caches myself, it's time for them to go. The cache owner may then say he fixed it or that it was fine all along, but he lied in either case. Your mileage may vary. And I get DNFs on my caches, yet no reviewer action. Go figure.

Edited June 7, 2017 by kunarion

[+hzoi]

I'll post a Note rather than a DNF if I didn't even search.

Ditto. DNF to me means I looked for it and wasn't able to find it. If I didn't even have the opportunity to start looking, I leave a note.

 

I did this before there was an automatic system and the chance of a "false positive" for DNF logs, so that development didn't change my practice.

Edited June 7, 2017 by hzoi

[+J Grouchy]

I'll post a Note rather than a DNF if I didn't even search.

Ditto. DNF to me means I looked for it and wasn't able to find it. If I didn't even have the opportunity to start looking, I leave a note.

 

I did this before there was an automatic system and the chance of a "false positive" for DNF logs, so that development didn't change my practice.

 

Same. "Did not find" implies one actually tried searching for it at GZ. If you aren't even able to do that much, then a Note is most appropriate...if you even log it all. Happens to me all the time and more often than not I don't even post any log at all unless I believe muggles may be a common factor in preventing people from looking. One cache I visited numerous times always had a police car sitting less than 20 feet away. I logged several notes on that one until one day I tried and the coast was clear. Another was an LPC directly in front of a shopping center that had both a movie theater, a Panera and a Starbucks...which basically made it impossible to search between the hours of 5am and about midnight.

[+narcissa]

I write DNFs primarily for myself, so if I cancel a search because of a muggle nearby, I write a DNF so I can track it and look for the cache later. I always figured that it was useful for others to know that muggles might be an issue.

 

With the way the site has changed, I am considering an offline method of recording these things, since DNFs are now equivalent to NAs and I don't want to cause trouble for cache owners.

[+lee737]

Yes. If we get to GZ and abort a search I would use a DNF, if we park and note a swarm of muggles at GZ, we usually leave it as a write note.

This one springs to mind..... https://coord.info/GC67HCB

[+Team Microdot]

DNFs are now equivalent to NAs.

 

No, they aren't.

[+WearyTraveler]

I've only had one of these - out caching and a homeless person was sleeping in the corner where GZ was. I logged a write note and explained. A muggle is out of a searcher's control.

 

The note lets the CO know that his cache is still in play.

[+barefootjeff]

I'll post a Note rather than a DNF if I didn't even search. DNFs have consequences!

 

(I saw a reviewer send a CO up a mountain after a single DNF. It's been discussed elsewhere, but the effect is, don't DNF.)

I've seen those threads. But every cache I've seen archived (or even addressed by the CO and then not archived) due to DNF, needed it. I've never seen a false positive. They are that bad, I saw those caches myself, it's time for them to go. The cache owner may then say he fixed it or that it was fine all along, but he lied in either case. Your mileage may vary. And I get DNFs on my caches, yet no reviewer action. Go figure.

Back in December one of my caches was pinged by the Cache Health Score because of one DNF, with the email giving me the options of immediately visiting and repairing it, disabling it until I could, or archiving it. The cache was only 7 weeks old and had had one previous find at the time of the DNF. It turned out the searcher had been put off by muggles and was looking in the wrong place; she went back a week later and found it. So yes, DNFs due to muggles do have consequences.

[+Manville Possum]

Back in December one of my caches was pinged by the Cache Health Score because of one DNF, with the email giving me the options of immediately visiting and repairing it, disabling it until I could, or archiving it. The cache was only 7 weeks old and had had one previous find at the time of the DNF. It turned out the searcher had been put off by muggles and was looking in the wrong place; she went back a week later and found it. So yes, DNFs due to muggles do have consequences.

 

Wow, and I see them stack up on neglected listings all the time. I wish our local reviewers would do a purge.

[+CAVinoGal]

OK. this discussion is quite helpful to me as a "newbie" geocacher. When to "DNF", when to write a note, when to do nothing and come back later...

 

I've only logged one "DNF", and that was a on a cache I absolutely KNEW was MIA. I also sent a message to the CO, the cache was quickly replaced and I could log a FIND! On others that I didn't find (or in some cases, didn't even LOOK when I got close to GZ for various reasons) I have done nothing, or left a note. On one, I simply contacted the CO to let her know it was missing; no DNF, just a quick replacement of the cache.

 

Some of my DNF's (unlogged, but a DNF when I went to search) I attribute to my newness as a geocacher. Some I simply decided not to attempt, due to muggles, a homeless guy sleeping 5 ft from GZ, or 150 ft through the weeds as tall as me to get to GZ....not today, thanks! I didn't leave notes either, and that may be a better way to go than simply moving on to the next one on my list for the day.

 

Although a newbie to caching myself, I've watched my son mature in the hobby for the past 12 years, meet his (now) wife, and now I'm meeting their geocache friends, so a lot of the caches I'm finding (or not) belong to him or HIS friends; dealing with DNF's may be a bit different from my end!

 

It does make sense to log it as a DNF if I really did a good search and truly Did Not Find it. An explanation in would help determine if it's MIA or I just didn't find it ... yet. If I never really looked for it due to muggles, homeless sleepers, weeds, wildlife, or whatever, then it shouldn't be a DNF. Writing a note to explain why I didn't look after trying to get to GZ makes perfect sense.

[+Pontiac_CZ]

I do post a DNF in these cases. My cache hunts end with either FI or DNF. So if I don't sign the log, it's a DNF with reason described. Cachers (including the CO) deserve to know that the GZ may be occasionally muggled and the CO may even consider finding a better place for the cache. And last but not least I as a CO appreciate to know that someone is so nice to not threaten my cache in muggly conditions and gives up searching instead.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

I've only had one of these - out caching and a homeless person was sleeping in the corner where GZ was. I logged a write note and explained. A muggle is out of a searcher's control.

 

The note lets the CO know that his cache is still in play.

 

A muggle may be out of the searchers control but and DNF may be a better log to notify other seekers that they might encounter the same muggle and have the same result.

 

 

[+redsox_mark]

I'll post a Note rather than a DNF if I didn't even search. DNFs have consequences!

 

(I saw a reviewer send a CO up a mountain after a single DNF. It's been discussed elsewhere, but the effect is, don't DNF.)

I've seen those threads. But every cache I've seen archived (or even addressed by the CO and then not archived) due to DNF, needed it. I've never seen a false positive. They are that bad, I saw those caches myself, it's time for them to go. The cache owner may then say he fixed it or that it was fine all along, but he lied in either case. Your mileage may vary. And I get DNFs on my caches, yet no reviewer action. Go figure.

 

Whilst a cache will only be archived if the CO doesn't respond, I've seen lots of cases (and there have been lots of threads with examples too) of caches where the CO either receives a "bad health" auto email from Groundspeak, or disabled by reviewer, for a single DNF or small number of DNFs. And in many cases the cache turned out to be fine.

 

Because of that I tend to only log DNF if I was able to look. If I didn't look and the reason might apply to other finders (e.g. too many muggles) I'll log a note.

 

I know, in theory DNF means I didn't find, and nothing else. But the tools and reviewer sweeps interpret DNF as "it might be missing". If I didn't even look, I don't want the health score or other auto tools to think "it might be missing".

Edited June 8, 2017 by redsox_mark

[+WearyTraveler]

I've only had one of these - out caching and a homeless person was sleeping in the corner where GZ was. I logged a write note and explained. A muggle is out of a searcher's control.

 

The note lets the CO know that his cache is still in play.

 

A muggle may be out of the searchers control but and DNF may be a better log to notify other seekers that they might encounter the same muggle and have the same result.

 

I prefer the "write note" route. Keeps my personal f/find ratio in order (I know, I know - numbers...) and with all the recent posts about DNFs being bad, writing a note that details the occurrence still alerts CO and future seekers (if they're reading logs) of the issue.

[+justintim1999]

If for some reason I can't search to the point I'm satisfied that I'm not going to find it or it's missing I'll post a note and not a dnf.

[+MysteryGuy1]

Thanks for the replies. I like the idea of writing a note in cases where I didn't get to do a complete search.

[+jellis]

I know there's been some discussions on here about when people do/don't log their DNFs, but here's one aspect I have not seen covered. Do you typically log a DNF in cases where the presence of muggles prevents you from doing a thorough search? Or even any search at all? I only recently started logging DNFs, but I will only do so if I've looked in every place I could think of. If I only gave a half-hearted search to avoid looking suspicious, I will not log that. If I didn't even approach GZ because a muggle was parked 20 feet away, I won't log that either. How about you?

I prefer to just write a note instead of a DNF because it gives the CO the impression the cache has an issue til they read you log. Still wish they had a Did not Try

[+bflentje]

I know there's been some discussions on here about when people do/don't log their DNFs, but here's one aspect I have not seen covered. Do you typically log a DNF in cases where the presence of muggles prevents you from doing a thorough search? Or even any search at all? I only recently started logging DNFs, but I will only do so if I've looked in every place I could think of. If I only gave a half-hearted search to avoid looking suspicious, I will not log that. If I didn't even approach GZ because a muggle was parked 20 feet away, I won't log that either. How about you?

I prefer to just write a note instead of a DNF because it gives the CO the impression the cache has an issue til they read you log. Still wish they had a Did not Try

 

Did Not Find is still not did not find, in the purest sense of the words. DNF's still bother you for as long as you've been around?

[+edexter]

In the situation you are describing "where the presence of muggles prevents you from doing a thorough search", I log a note. I reserve dnf for caches that I searched for and couldn't find. If I can't search because a muggle was at GZ, that's what the note says.

[+jellis]

I know there's been some discussions on here about when people do/don't log their DNFs, but here's one aspect I have not seen covered. Do you typically log a DNF in cases where the presence of muggles prevents you from doing a thorough search? Or even any search at all? I only recently started logging DNFs, but I will only do so if I've looked in every place I could think of. If I only gave a half-hearted search to avoid looking suspicious, I will not log that. If I didn't even approach GZ because a muggle was parked 20 feet away, I won't log that either. How about you?

I prefer to just write a note instead of a DNF because it gives the CO the impression the cache has an issue til they read you log. Still wish they had a Did not Try

 

Did Not Find is still not did not find, in the purest sense of the words. DNF's still bother you for as long as you've been around?

strange you pick me to say that when I can read other posts from others who feel the same way.

[+eigengott]

Do you typically log a DNF in cases where the presence of muggles prevents you from doing a thorough search? Or even any search at all?

 

As a player I do this. And why not? I have a story to tell, that's what logs are for. The logtype merely reflects if I found the cache (and signed the logbook) or not.

[+niraD]

Do you typically log a DNF in cases where the presence of muggles prevents you from doing a thorough search? Or even any search at all?

As a player I do this. And why not? I have a story to tell, that's what logs are for. The logtype merely reflects if I found the cache (and signed the logbook) or not.

To me, "Did Not Find" implies that at least some searching took place. It seems rather inauthentic to me to post a "Did Not Find" log on a cache that I didn't actually search for. That's why I log DNS ("Did Not Search") logs as Notes, rather than as DNFs.

[+Ambrosia]

To me, the main types of logs are Found it, or Didn't find it. When I go out to look for a cache, it ends in either of the two.

 

Notes are for other sorts of communication on the cache page, not about finding or not finding.

 

But that's just how my brain works! I understand that some other people think differently.

 

One of my favorite DNF's was for a cache where a non cacher was sitting right next to it. When I think of DNF's, I usually think of this one, even though it was 12 years ago. It was a lovely day of caching, and we were out with my brother Zephyr, who we rarely cache with. A pretty walk in a nice park, and then we find a young man sitting right there, enjoying the park and playing his guitar. We waited a few minutes, but it looked like he had settled there for the day. I posted a DNF and uploaded some pictures to remember it by.

 

Queen Anne Typo log

[+eigengott]

To me, "Did Not Find" implies that ...

 

That's the problem: Many geocachers think that DNF implies something beyond not finding the cache. And everyone has slightly different opinions, on what is implied.

 

Some typical but wrong implications:

* DNF = the cacher was to dumb to find it

* DNF = the geocache is missing

* DNF = the geocacher has searched at least 5 minutes for the cache

* DNF = the geocache needs maintenance

* DNF = the geocache should be archived

 

I agree with you though, that when I don't even start the geocaching tour, I don't post a DNF. Not even a note then. Example: I decide in the morning to go for a nice cache on a mountain in the afternoon. After a very good lunch I skip that plan and head for a nap instead.