Stumped By A Field Puzzle

[+JL_HSTRE]

You're doing a cache with some kind of Field Puzzle component. You find the puzzle, but are unable to solve the puzzle and thus cannot get to the logsheet or next stage. Note or DNF?

Edited January 17, 2017 by Joshism

[+niraD]

You're doing a cache with some kind of Field Puzzle component. You find the puzzle, but are unable to solve the puzzle and thus cannot get to the logsheet or next stage. Note or DNF?

There have been times when I visited a cache/stage location to perform "reconnaissance" with no expectation of actually retrieving, signing, or replacing anything. I logged a Note.

 

But if I visited the final location and actually searched for the cache (actually attempted to retrieve, sign, and replace the cache/log), then I'd log either a Find or a DNF.

[+narcissa]

Detailed DNF.

[+colleda]

If I'd attempted the puzzle and failed I'd DNF it. Had one like that last week.

https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC6X5ZK_safe-and-sound

[+dprovan]

DNF

[+Pontiac_CZ]

Detailed DNF.

+1

[+Optimist on the run]

If I'd found the cache, but not been able to open it, I'd put a note not a DNF. If I couldn't find the cache at all I'd put a DNF.

[cezanne]

You're doing a cache with some kind of Field Puzzle component. You find the puzzle, but are unable to solve the puzzle and thus cannot get to the logsheet or next stage. Note or DNF?

 

DNF

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Detailed DNF.

 

I did one of those puzzle box field box where where one needs to twist and turn the box to get a metal ball to drop into a spot which allows a switch to open the box. The previous cacher only posted a DNF message indicating that they couldn't get to the log. I twisted one time, the ball dropped into place, it opened up, and I was FTF.

 

 

[+Isonzo Karst]

You need to start carrying some additional tools of the trade: bolt cutters. ;-)

If'n you can't cut your way in, you can generally beat it to death.

 

On a slightly more serious note, that'd be a DNF: "found cache, didn't sign log, thanks for another hide along the way".

[+TriciaG]

DNF.

[+J Grouchy]

If I'd found the cache, but not been able to open it, I'd put a note not a DNF. If I couldn't find the cache at all I'd put a DNF.

 

^^ This. I take the word "find" pretty literally when it comes to DNF v. Note.

[+hzoi]

DNF.

[+The Leprechauns]

I'm bad at puzzles, whether they're "solve at home" or field puzzles.

 

Recently I decided I wanted to try some of WV Tim's famous gadget caches in West Virginia. After all, so many people are finding them, and they have hundreds of favorite points, so what could go wrong? I drove to the very heart of WV Tim country and stayed the night in a hotel.

 

This DNF log tells what happened next.

[+thebruce0]

Tough. My first instinct would be to log a note. I feel like I've "found the cache", just couldn't access the sheet; it feels like a DNF implies I couldn't find the container. If it's a field puzzle, it's more a mental block than a physical one. I dunno. I suppose it might depend whether you consider it 'finding' of the container or the logsheet

At the same time, I wouldn't know if perhaps there was some other step after that field puzzle and the puzzle itself wasn't actually the cache container; in which case a DNF (by the above definition) would be more accurate.

 

I would think that either log type would be acceptable (at least, as a CO I wouldn't mind either type if someone posted to a field puzzle of mine they couldn't solve).

Personally, I'd judge it case by case; likely favouring the note but would also consider a DNF. *shrug*

[+Oxford Stone]

I once dropped a TB whilst DNFing! The outer container is large enough for swag and TBs, the puzzle container with the log is much smaller (one of those wooden boxes where you need to hold diagonally opposite corners in just the right spot to slide it open)

[+bflentje]

Tough. My first instinct would be to log a note. I feel like I've "found the cache", just couldn't access the sheet; it feels like a DNF implies I couldn't find the container. If it's a field puzzle, it's more a mental block than a physical one. I dunno. I suppose it might depend whether you consider it 'finding' of the container or the logsheet

 

I'd agree it's a normal feeling for some. But for me, if your name is not on the log, it's not considered a find online.. which means, I Did Not Find it. DNF.

 

I have over 1100 DNF's and am proud of every one of them. My opinion is the DNF is part of the story so I log every one if any (obvious) attempt to make it towards GZ was made.

[+fraggle_[DE]]

..You find the puzzle, but are unable to solve the puzzle and thus cannot get to the logsheet or next stage. Note or DNF?

 

If something is damaged and prevents me from getting to the logsheet or next statiom, I log a 'Needs Maintenance'.

If I am just unable to solve the puzzle, I log nothing and try again later or, at the very most, log a note.

 

But I would never log a DNF. DNF means 'did not find'. But I found it and just am unable to log because of one of the above two reasons.

[+J Grouchy]

I have over 1100 DNF's and am proud of every one of them.

 

I see people say this, but I'm trying to understand it. Of course a DNF is not something to be upset or ashamed of, but I don't really see it as some point of pride. It's sort of like saying "I missed the goal 1100 times and am proud of every kick." It was just a kick. Maybe it was a good kick, maybe not. It just...was. Still not really something to hold up as a shining example no matter how low the bar is set. There are countless things that one does daily and shouldn't feel bad about, yet still aren't really worth celebrating.

 

~shrug~

[cezanne]

I have over 1100 DNF's and am proud of every one of them.

 

I see people say this, but I'm trying to understand it. Of course a DNF is not something to be upset or ashamed of, but I don't really see it as some point of pride.

 

I'd say the pride comes from writing logs in such cases and from accepting DNFs as normal consequence of searching for caches (at least when not using phone jokers, relying on throw downs etc).

 

I would not necessarily compare a DNF with missing the goal as there are so many reasons for a DNF.

 

For some of my DNFs I was offered the permission to log a found it (e.g. when there was no log sheet available, the container could not be opened, or got lost etc) and I'm proud of having taken down all these offers.

Edited January 17, 2017 by cezanne

[+J Grouchy]

I'd say the pride comes from writing logs in such cases and from accepting DNFs as normal consequence of searching for caches (at least when not using phone jokers, relying on throw downs etc).

 

For some of my DNFs I was offered the permission to log a found it (e.g. when there was no log sheet available, the container could not be opened, or got lost etc) and I'm proud of having taken down all these offers.

 

That's not really the same as being proud of a DNF log. That's pride in being honest.

 

A child's mother wouldn't say "I'm proud of you for not knowing the answer to the essay test question." They would say "I'm proud of you for trying your best to answer it" or "I'm proud of you for not cheating."

 

There's a difference between saying "there's no shame in not finding it" and "I'm proud to log that I didn't find it".

[cezanne]

There's a difference between saying "there's no shame in not finding it" and "I'm proud to log that I didn't find it".

 

As so many cachers do not log DNFs which I regard as wrong, I can see reasons to feel proud for logging DNFs.

 

Personally, I do not feel pride too often but that's subjective and not really related to DNFs.

 

In any case I normally do not consider DNFs as failure but rather just as a fact.

 

Those who accept log permissions and mention this in their logs will also consider them as being honest. That's rather a question of etiquette what

a find and a DNF means to a particular cacher. Some think that if a cache was gone and they did not make a mistake, it's fully ok to accept a log permission.

Edited January 17, 2017 by cezanne

[+niraD]

As so many cachers do not log DNFs which I regard as wrong, I can see reasons to feel proud for logging DNFs.

This strikes me as being similar to being proud of picking up litter.

 

In a perfect world, everyone would pick up litter, and doing so wouldn't be special. (Well, in a truly perfect world, there wouldn't be any litter, but that breaks the analogy.) But when so few people pick up litter, doing so becomes noteworthy, and perhaps something to be proud of.

[+fizzymagic]

DNF.

[+dprovan]

I have over 1100 DNF's and am proud of every one of them.

I see people say this, but I'm trying to understand it. Of course a DNF is not something to be upset or ashamed of, but I don't really see it as some point of pride.

Meh. I had a similar reaction at first, but when I thought about it, I decided the token "DNF" can be taken to signify the log entry rather than the actual failure to find the cache, so I read the comment as "I'm proud of the fact that I've shown acceptance of my failures with log entries."

 

I'm downright ashamed of some of my caching failures, but, then, those often make the most interesting DNFs, so I can still be proud of each and every DNF log entry while also being embarrassed to have not found some of the caches the DNFs reflect.

[+bflentje]

I have over 1100 DNF's and am proud of every one of them.

 

I see people say this, but I'm trying to understand it. Of course a DNF is not something to be upset or ashamed of, but I don't really see it as some point of pride. It's sort of like saying "I missed the goal 1100 times and am proud of every kick." It was just a kick. Maybe it was a good kick, maybe not. It just...was. Still not really something to hold up as a shining example no matter how low the bar is set. There are countless things that one does daily and shouldn't feel bad about, yet still aren't really worth celebrating.

 

~shrug~

 

There's a difference between being proud and celebrating.. I believe you're taking my talking point to an extreme.

[+bflentje]

I'd say the pride comes from writing logs in such cases and from accepting DNFs as normal consequence of searching for caches (at least when not using phone jokers, relying on throw downs etc).

 

For some of my DNFs I was offered the permission to log a found it (e.g. when there was no log sheet available, the container could not be opened, or got lost etc) and I'm proud of having taken down all these offers.

 

That's not really the same as being proud of a DNF log. That's pride in being honest.

 

A child's mother wouldn't say "I'm proud of you for not knowing the answer to the essay test question." They would say "I'm proud of you for trying your best to answer it" or "I'm proud of you for not cheating."

 

There's a difference between saying "there's no shame in not finding it" and "I'm proud to log that I didn't find it".

 

That's more than just a bit of a stretch.. lame actually. Bottom line is, I don't care whether YOU log them or not. Whether proud or unashamed, I have no problem sharing my successes and my failures.

[+Gill & Tony]

If I couldn't find the container at all - DNF

If I found the container but couldn't get at the log due to damage (container rusted shut etc.) - NM

If I found the container but couldn't open it due to the puzzle being too hard - Note (or nothing, probably Note)

 

On the subject of DNF pride: I'm not proud of my DNF's, nor am I ashamed of them, they are just a fact of life.

[+Walts Hunting]

Let's not forget the other option. Ignore list and move on.

[cezanne]

If I couldn't find the container at all - DNF

If I found the container but couldn't get at the log due to damage (container rusted shut etc.) - NM

If I found the container but couldn't open it due to the puzzle being too hard - Note (or nothing, probably Note)

 

On the subject of DNF pride: I'm not proud of my DNF's, nor am I ashamed of them, they are just a fact of life.

 

If you regard them like me as a fact, I wonder why you log only NM in the second case and at most a note and potentially nothing in the third case. For me NM is not a replacement for a log reflecting my visit to a cache.

 

As the third case is regarded, I can live with a note but think that not writing a log is the wrong approach, regardless of how long someone tried to find/open ...... a cache. If everyone would use this approach, a quite challenging cache or a cache with an issue could end up as one where only success stories are reported which is quite an unfortunate outcome in my opinion (and it's also the wrong message to the cache owner if he/she wants to see how difficult a cache is for the searchers).

 

I wonder about something else: Many cachers here log a found it only when they can sign the log. So I wonder then why they interpret DNF as have not found the container. Using that logic they would need to log a found it once they can see the container and then we are back at what many frown upon: those that for example log a cache hidden up in a tree and report that they could see the container (clearly labeled and not to be confused with something else) but were not able to get up to it.

Edited January 18, 2017 by cezanne

[+on4bam]

If I couldn't find the container at all - DNF

If I found the container but couldn't get at the log due to damage (container rusted shut etc.) - NM

If I found the container but couldn't open it due to the puzzle being too hard - Note (or nothing, probably Note)

 

On the subject of DNF pride: I'm not proud of my DNF's, nor am I ashamed of them, they are just a fact of life.

 

For the second possibility, DNF + NM.

As long as I can't sign the log (rusted, not solved) it's DNF

 

As for logging nothing at all, I reserve that for the occasional holiday cache where I don't have time to search as I would on a normal caching trip (quick glance, seen nothing not willing to spend extra time to write log afterwards). I don't think I have more than 10 like that anyway and it's not likely I'll be back anyway.

DNFs, just like found, NM are a snapshot of what happened, nothing more, nothing less.

[+iamlongball]

Personally, I either log a DNF, note or Find for every cache I search for. As someone who placed some, I like to know when people have traveled and searched for my caches, so I appreciate when they are logged by others, regardless if they find them or not. So I do the same to others. For caches that don't have a ton of activity, don't you want to know when people have been searching for them? I don't see a DNF as a failure. I see it more as an opportunity for a future success. So I log them, if I have them, so I can always go back and find them later when I am in the area again.

 

I think everyone's opinions differ on the topic. If I was to find a cache, as I did this last weekend, that was frozen to the ground, I would log it as found and state I didn't sign the log. The worst thing I could do is use an object to try to unfreeze it from the ground, and damage the cache, thus causing future damage to the log or other items. I have had that twice recently, where the container was made of a thinner plastic, and froze to the ground. Of course it was -6 degrees out.

[+thebruce0]

I think everyone's opinions differ on the topic. If I was to find a cache, as I did this last weekend, that was frozen to the ground, I would log it as found and state I didn't sign the log. The worst thing I could do is use an object to try to unfreeze it from the ground, and damage the cache, thus causing future damage to the log or other items. I have had that twice recently, where the container was made of a thinner plastic, and froze to the ground. Of course it was -6 degrees out.

Likewise, though I'd also photo the container, and if the CO had good reason for deleting the log (perhaps another step or some trick to accessing the sheet which I couldn't have seen since I couldn't open the container, for example) then that's fine. But if they delete the log merely because my name isn't on the logsheet, technically that's their perogative as CO and I couldn't fight it since that's the requirement for a Find log. I don't know too many COs in my area that would be strict enough to do that though, most would let the find stand if it's clear the finder would have been able to sign the sheet if it weren't frozen. But some might ask for confirmation of the container to verify it was actually found (thus the photo evidence is always a good idea).

[+narcissa]

I think everyone's opinions differ on the topic. If I was to find a cache, as I did this last weekend, that was frozen to the ground, I would log it as found and state I didn't sign the log. The worst thing I could do is use an object to try to unfreeze it from the ground, and damage the cache, thus causing future damage to the log or other items. I have had that twice recently, where the container was made of a thinner plastic, and froze to the ground. Of course it was -6 degrees out.

 

This is not equivalent to the situation in the original post, which involves a field puzzle, not a cache that you can't open because of outdoor conditions or container failure.

 

Most reasonable cache owners will accept a log in the latter situation.

[+Corfman Clan]

Does it even matter? Just log it how you see fit.

[+barefootjeff]

If I'd been replying a month ago I'd have said to DNF it, as for me a find is putting my name in the logbook and anything short of that is a DNF. However, having experienced first hand the side effects just one DNF can have, with HQ's maintenance bot particularly vigorous with new high D/T caches that don't get enough finds to keep it pacified, I'll now think twice about logging my failed attempts that way.

[+bflentje]

If I'd been replying a month ago I'd have said to DNF it, as for me a find is putting my name in the logbook and anything short of that is a DNF. However, having experienced first hand the side effects just one DNF can have, with HQ's maintenance bot particularly vigorous with new high D/T caches that don't get enough finds to keep it pacified, I'll now think twice about logging my failed attempts that way.

 

We need to fight the bot. I will continue to log the way I consider to be proper.