February 10, 2013 at 9:40 pm #1804
It’s amazing that many respected geocachers are still reluctant to log their failures. I’ve come across these logs recently (for which I attach NO user names!)
- Needs Maintenance – This appears to be missing despite a good search (but there was no accompanying DNF log and there was no history of DNFs on this cache!)
- Posted a Note – Flipping well finally found you!…. Oh no… It’s another letter box… 🙁 (but once again no accompanying DNF log)
- Found It – But when I got to within 10 feet of this one, was totally devastated, A man in a Yellow top confronted me. I said could I just go inside the fenced off area please, he retorted, no way , go and keep out. So I think I can add this to my finds, if its ok with you (what can I say – a Found Log when a cacher didn’t even get to GZ!)
- Found It -We found the location for the Geo-cache, but alas, the cache itself wasn’t there!
So, are “Needs Maintenance”, “Posted a Note” and “Found It” logs all euphemisms for a DNF log!
Other cachers, cache owners and reviewers all need accurate DNF logs to help them – so why are so many cachers reluctant to log them?February 11, 2013 at 6:57 am #1805
You see a few things like that, and I think you have to relax your view of things – people play the game in different ways, and that includes cheating for some on occasion. A couple of examples of the past few months that surprised me;
In your example, logging as a found when you haven’t signed the log (or at least found the container) is clearly not a find by any definition. Mistakes happen, but I recently informed a well known local cacher that it was likely their yellow smiley in a very long list of DNF’s for what was obviously a missing cache was probably a mistake, their reply was “I didn’t keep tally during that walk” but they left it there along with several others that were unlikely finds. Nothing I can do, other than lose a bit of respect for them as I’d expected them to change it.
Another which surprised me was a large group that couldn’t find a cache and persuaded themselves it was missing, then replacing it with a new cache. They were all honest about reporting it as such, some in that group claimed that as a find, some as a DNF – but when the original was found by the next cacher (along with the replacement), it was met with disbelief and the attitude of “If the CO disagrees, they can delete my log” rather than admit they failed to find it.
I’ve been accused of expecting too much of people before, maybe this is another example and I shouldn’t care?February 11, 2013 at 5:24 pm #1806
I suspect the human behaviour trait of not wanting to admit defeat comes into play.
Anon — ( I own up! ) — GH.February 12, 2013 at 12:38 pm #1811LympstoneBogtrottersParticipant
EDUCATION – EDUCATION – EDUCATION
I quite regularly shoot (usually newbies admittedly) cachers emails via geocaching.com informing them of correct caching etiquette – have even made some long standing caching friendships this way. If you dont fancy getting embroilled in a slanging match or worse, you can always get your local friendly reviewer to take the case up on EVERYONES behalf….
DNF’s are hugely important on lots of levels, not forgetting that our very own Hobo and Miss have a challenge on Dartmoor that is only findable after NOT finding 100 caches!!!!February 13, 2013 at 5:58 am #1812
When I find (or even DNF) a cache I rarely look at the D/T rating but always ask myself “Why is it there?” and often have no answer. Thus, I put forward an argument that maybe there are simply too many caches out there. Cachers then become indifferent about reporting a DNF as there is always another cache just around the proverbial English corner. GH.February 13, 2013 at 6:50 pm #1815muddypuddlesParticipant
It doesn’t really bother me whether someone logs a DNF or not, except that if I have DNF’ed a cache that others seem to be finding, another DNF is a source of immense comfort to me!February 13, 2013 at 9:27 pm #1833
I,m certainly not in denial, just counted my DNF’s, i’ve got 65.February 23, 2013 at 12:09 am #1869HoboParticipant
We have recorded DNF on 199 different caches – watch out for a further challenge!!February 27, 2013 at 12:10 am #1898
A message from Groundspeak 🙂
Why to Log a DNF
You’ve looked. You really have. The geocache is not a container magnetized under the park bench. It’s not that funny looking rock, and of course it’s not under the lamp post cover. You’ve checked the previous logs and the hint. The geocache could be there, but you can’t seem to find it. You give up (for now). Geocaching doesn’t stop there though. Here’s what you do. You log a DNF on the geocache page. It’s “Did not find” and it means, “I care.”
When you log a DNF, you’re telling geocachers that the geocache may be more difficult to find than anticipated or may even be missing. You’re also letting the geocache owner know that they may need to double check that their geocache container can still be located at the posted coordinates.
If you’re a geocacher who logged any of the more than nine million DNF’s posted to Geocaching so far, thanks from the geocaching community. It’s a small way to help ensure the quality of geocaching. Plus, you can always go back and search again. Who knows, maybe this time you’ll catch a break and log a “Found it!”March 18, 2013 at 2:20 pm #1915
It seems that even the number 1 cachers in the UK are not too keen to log their DNFs as such 🙁 http://www.geocaching.com/seek/log.aspx?LUID=1471fc42-6330-4736-8249-8d8765a774f3March 19, 2013 at 4:47 pm #1920
Thinking of changing our “DNF” to a “Found” if those “Founds” that are obviously “DNFs” are not deleted!March 19, 2013 at 5:50 pm #1921
I cannot believe that Miss, like me you have standards and I don’t see you & Hobo as belonging to the “if you can’t beat them, join them” brigade.
Maybe a word to the COs to ask the cachers to delete those “Founds” might be in order?
A couple of those have only found a handful of caches, but when you have found over 25,000 …… 🙁March 19, 2013 at 6:02 pm #1922
A full analysis of the other 24,999, please!! GH.March 24, 2013 at 7:40 pm #1957
Well here’s the proof 🙁 I’ve taken the liberty of “borrowing” TC’s photo of the logbook.
I know there are some out there who will say “it’s only a game” or “it’s up to each individual how they play it” but I don’t agree – it is a game, but it has rules and there is a word we all know that applies to those who don’t follow them. Also very disappointed to see that the UK’s leading cachers disregard them so blatantly.
I’m beginning to get the feeling that I’m getting more support on this sort of subject than I used to. Interesting that TC felt the need to take the photo and publish it. Good one TC 🙂
Attachments:You must be logged in to view attached files.March 25, 2013 at 8:51 pm #1963
A good reason to log a DNF is that you sometimes get an email from the cache owner with an extra hint or an apology if they have just discovered it is missing.March 25, 2013 at 9:18 pm #1964
But if you are going to log it as a find you don’t need a hint 🙁March 26, 2013 at 9:03 pm #1965
If I was the CO I would delete the logs of those who didn’t sign the log.March 27, 2013 at 3:19 am #1966
So, would some of you eminent cachers with multiple active cache placements care to tell us how long it takes to check all the paper logs against the webpage logs and delete as necessary.
I have only a few active caches but could visit and check them all in about half a day. GH.March 27, 2013 at 6:56 am #1967
There are those with far more than my 50-odd, but my answer is: I don’t.
Honestly, I rarely read the logfiles – only those where I’ve supplied a proper book when sometimes cachers write a little story. Sometimes people log with different names if they’re going as a group, or names are really hard to read (especially with some waterproof paper). For the first year of being a CO I kept all my old logs carefully, and filled up some boxes with them. Then I thought; “Why am I doing this?” and now I skim them and bin them.
Logs are there mostly as closure for the cacher, imo. I certainly enjoy the physical act of signing and dating. Sometimes to confirm if there’s doubt, too, but generally I take the pragmatic view.
I do delete the odd log, usually where somebody has logged twice, after letting them know. For some reason GS let this count twice, although the true count is still there on the stats, the main one is incremented by however many times somebody logs the same cache. I’ve spotted some cachers who make a habit of this and they’re total/ uniques are quite different.March 27, 2013 at 9:17 am #1968
Don’t make a habit of reading every paper log but sometimes check, like dartymoor, if there’s a doubt. Also, like dartymoor, have deleted logs of people who have logged twice and not removed one when I’ve contacted them.
Also people who’ve logged a find but written a log saying they didn’t find it. Usually this is an honest mistake – have done it ourselves but always noticed and deleted without being told by CO.
The offending logs on Joy of Caching are by people who actually admit to not signing the log so no checking is neccessary.
The peculiarity to total/unique being genuinely different is for those who go after “Ye Olde Survey Monuments” caches which are virtuals which move but always have the same GC number. There is even a league table for those who have logged multiple finds on it/them!March 27, 2013 at 9:29 am #1969
When I started this topic it was to highlight that many cachers were very reluctant to log DNFs. It has evolved into a discussion about whether you need to sign the physical log and should these be checked. I don’t check my physical logs and don’t intend to (I’ve over 160 active caches) but I will not accept cachers replacing my caches with their own and logging that (unless agreed in advance when they are doing me a favour). If the cache is there I expect them to find it, if they can’t I expect a DNF. I have never deleted a found log but have asked several to change them, which they have.
The issue here are those special caches that are not only required to be found but also for the log to be accessed. Joy of Caching 24 is clearly one of those, finding the pipe is NOT finding the cache. It is the same with a cache 20 feet up a tree, I can see it from the ground but if I am not inclined to climb the tree then there is no way I should log a find. We recently spent a day with Andy Amberel, he said that he would not log a find unless he knew he was capable of retrieving the cache. So, no sending up the children or grandchildren for him!
It is natural that different cachers will have different views on this and that is fine. However, imho, logging a find when you have not even been able to retrieve the cache, let alone the log, is not ok.March 28, 2013 at 11:47 am #1970forgetful elephantParticipant
How wonderful it is that so many of you have so much free time that you can spend you time worrying about how other people cache and what, in your opinion, we should all do about it. If someones wants to cheat and log a find when the did not sign the log, then the only person they cheat is themselves. I don’t have the time or the inclination to check every log entry to see who is telling the truth or not. At the end of the days which would you rather? I spent my time policing caches or inventing new ones. I know which I would rather do.March 28, 2013 at 3:09 pm #1971Tamerton ChocolatesParticipant
Just noticed the discussion about JOC 24. I only posted that log to show that the cache isn’t broken (and the previous ‘finders’ were clearly using the wrong tool and should try harder)
Couldn’t really care less whether or not people sign the log – as FE says – their loss. Have on occasion not signed it myself when the log more resembles paper-mache or I can’t get the nano’s open by hand. Most of those aren’t worth visiting twice anyway.March 30, 2013 at 9:57 am #1972
This is My First Post. I never thought about geocachers cheating until a few weeks ago but something happened which seriously made me wonder.
my children and I were doing some of the Bodmin Bounds series. Each of my Children released Travel Bugs.
My Daughter placed one in a trad cache. My son in a mystery cache. (which involved research before our trip)
A few days after release a geocacher with 10,000 finds and 500 ish logged trackables found a huge chunk of the BB series.
The mystery cache was in a beautiful location and had a few favourite points. He logged the cache with a quite non descript log as I guess some do. However he didn’t take the TB?? When he visited the Trad Cache he did take the TB!?
I actually thought for several weeks he must of took the TB and not logged it until another cacher picked up the TB a few weeks later and moved it on.
Obviously i have no proof without seeing the log but i honestly believe this cacher on this occasion cheated which i find pretty sad and desperate.
with my own caches i dont check the log books. Honesty and integrity i hope are values most cachers posess.March 30, 2013 at 10:07 am #1974
Hi Finderman – Welcome to the dartmoor.geocaching forums. Now I’ve moderated your first post you will be able to make further posts without awaiting moderation.
I guess you’ve had a wake up call regarding geocachers cheating. I’m afraid it’s all too common. Some consider that they are only cheating themselves, others that they are doing the whole game a mis-service and you will see both sides of that argument in this forum.
My personal conclusion is that the game is increasingly driven “by the numbers” and many will do anything to get up that ranking list. You may be interested in the forum http://www.dartmoorgeocaching.co.uk/forums/topic/its-all-about-the-numbers-but-is-it
I look forward to your future posts.
DaveMarch 30, 2013 at 11:57 am #1975LympstoneBogtrottersParticipant
I too would like to welcome finderman to our homely Forum, but feel compelled to fight the corner of ”thinly- veiled-cacher-with-10,000-finds-and-500-TB-Discoveries”. There could be many and varied reasons why said mentioned cacher, who’s identity I HAVEN’T bothered to find out, didn’t retrieve your son’s TB…………
But to accuse a cacher of a DNF on the basis of a non-descript log and not retrieving a TB is just not the way to win friends and influence people is it?
Recently, while trying to track down a missing TB, I visited one of my caches to double check on some log entries. The same week the TB went walk-about from my cache, a caching team had posted a found it log on-line but there was no evidence whatsoever of a written log in the cache itself. Upon contacting them for clarification they pointed out that they don’t generally sign the logbooks; for them the pleasure is in LOCATING the actual cache. They provided me with a detailed description of the cache location and container, and offered to send photographic proof of their visit, which of course I declined as it was by then patently obvious that they had indeed visited my cache. Never did get to the bottom of what happened to the TB though………………..
Right! I’m off to visit Finderman’s TB’s to see how the’re doingMarch 30, 2013 at 6:23 pm #1983
We often don’t bother to pick up TBs but occasionally we do. No real rhyme or reason why one gets taken and another doesn’t. It certainly doesn’t mean we didn’t visit the cache that still has one in after we’ve been there!March 30, 2013 at 11:17 pm #1984
Hi Lympstone Bogtrotters.
1. I am not ACCUSING a cacher of a DNF. I am posting my personal thoughts and feelings on a geocaching experience I had.
2. Having thousands of finds is brilliant. I wish I could but a full time job and two young children will mean that might be some way off at the moment. The reason I mentioned their Tally is I thought the cacher who has a few finds might be more inclined to (a) leave a TB because they don’t know what it is or (b) take a TB and forget all about it.
I always think a TB is safer with an experienced cacher.
As for signing the log. Groundspeak/geocaching rules state that the log must be signed to claim a find.
We all know we can get damaged/wet logs but I always take a photo in this situation.
Final note to mention. I am just joining in a friendly debate on this brilliant website. I am not concerned about whether I Win Friends or influence people.
I have plenty of friends.March 30, 2013 at 11:42 pm #1985
Once again this proves to be an emotive subject! I’m not certain that I agree with finderman’s original conclusion but it was an understandable view to take. However, he is absolutely right about the necessity to sign the log (assuming it is signable) before claiming a find. It is a fundamental requirement for taking part in geocaching and if you are not prepared to sign a log then maybe you should stick to munzees! Fortunately the sliding tackle from LB doesn’t seem to have deterred our new member and hopefully we will hear more of his views.April 3, 2013 at 1:51 pm #1994
I spotted this in one of yesterday’s logs and couldn’t agree more 🙂
“I am going to log a DNF here. If I park up somewhere, with the hope or intent to find a cache, it means a Find or a DNF, not a Note, even if I’m not sure I’m in the right spot.”April 4, 2013 at 6:25 am #1998
There is, I believe, occasion when this is too simplistic to take the third option; Write note.
“DNA” = did not attempt, for reasons such as muggles, car parked next to it, picnics on top of it etc.
Putting a DNF for this… Well I’ve done it, but lately I’ve become aware that many people use the Found/DNF count to indicate if there’s a problem or if it’s particularly difficult – and choose not to go near.
(As a bit of fun and because I was bored the other night, I spent ten minutes logging DNF’s on half a dozen “Do not find this cache!” variants from New Zealand, Germany and America… )April 10, 2013 at 10:52 pm #2040
I need to throw something out to you lovely people on here. I’ve had a DNF on one of my caches ‘A Nomads Retreat’ (between Hemerdon and Lee Moor). The DNF can be viewed by anyone.
The nature of the DNF was Cows in the way…Lots of Gorse… Recent broken wrist which meant could only search with a stick.
He/she ended the DNF with ‘I think I should be able to log it anyway, could you let me know?’
How can you even contemplate logging a cache without finding it?!
That’s like saying well I saw the cache on the island in the middle of the stream so I logged it or I saw the cache in the tree but couldn’t get to it so i logged it or logging a cache in a cave without going in the cave!
I really don’t know how to respond. I’m actually shocked. Any ideas??!
I’ve walked miles before and not found a cache but I can honestly honestly say I wouldn’t dream of logging it.April 10, 2013 at 11:16 pm #2041
Now you understand why I started this topic! I saw that DNF come through earlier and I also wondered WHAT??!
At least this cacher didn’t log a find and hope it was OK as so many do 🙁
If I were finderman I would send the cacher an email stating that I didn’t think he had quite complied with either the spirit or the rules of geocaching AND attach a link to this topic 🙂April 11, 2013 at 8:38 am #2042
I’ve emailed the cacher:
” Thanks for your enquiry. I’m sorry that you didn’t find my cache. Why would you want to log a cache that you didn’t find? That would be cheating. I understand that the cows, the gorse and your broken wrist caused you problems but this is reflected in the terrain difficulty of the cache.
Its like saying If I went to a cache that was in a cave but when I arrived at the cave realised I didn’t have a torch so just stood at the entrance. Then went home and logged it.
That would be wrong. I would not have found the cache and experienced the cave.
I will be going out to check the cache in the next few days. I hope you have better luck if you attempt the cache in the future.”April 11, 2013 at 8:39 am #2043
I hope that wasn’t too harsh. Not a big fan of cheating. Makes me wonder how many of his caches are genuine finds.April 11, 2013 at 9:25 am #2044
Well I just got an email. The cacher said she felt frightened when stood at GZ!? Had to get away quick ( the cows maybe?? ). She said she lives 170 miles away and cache owners normally allow found it logs when the cache may be Muggled. Do they??!
I still don’t get this woman’s conscious. She is actually saying that she wants to log a cache she has NOT found.
I find that very strange. I might log about 20 caches in a minute that I haven’t found in the last 12 months that will make me feel awesome. ( joke)
Help me out here guys. I’m not being unreasonable am I?!April 11, 2013 at 9:33 am #2045
It sounds as though she makes a habit of doing this sort of cheating. You are not being unreasonable, just taking your responsibilities as a cache owner seriously. I would ask her how many other caches she has logged as found which she didn’t find. One of the main reasons for DNFs is so that the CO gets an idea that a cache may have gone, but even if it has it still shouldn’t be logged as found.
This is what Groundspeak say “As the owner of your cache listing, your responsibility includes quality control of all posts to the cache listing. Delete any logs that appear to be bogus, counterfeit, off-topic or otherwise inappropriate.”April 11, 2013 at 5:44 pm #2046
We’ve had people ask if they can log a find on our caches up trees cause they could see it! They have been told their name must be signed in the log.
Occasionally CO’s do say to go ahead and log a find on a cache that is definitely missing and you’ve shown you were in the right place and had found the empty hole or whatever.
We’ve have let people have finds very occasionally when there’s been a problem with a cache and we know for certain they’ve been to the right place. We’ve also been given finds occasionally for the same reason. Only very special circumstances though.
But we have never been given a find because we were afraid of the cows or gorse or were not fit enough to find it. If those circumstances arose we’d go home and try again another day! We wouldn’t allow a find under those circumstances either.April 11, 2013 at 5:51 pm #2047
What would have happened if there was a TB in the unfound (found) cache. Maybe she could have pretended to move it on by contacting the TB owner to get the tracking number!April 12, 2013 at 6:42 pm #2051
I once found a cache container minus its log that had been chewed by a dog, it was probably about 200 metres or so from where it should have been. I logged it as a DNF and cheekily wrote at the end of my log that i should be able to log it as a found seeing as how i found the cache container, the cache owner emailed to say it was ok to log it as a found, which i did. But even so when it was replaced i went back with pearlywhirly and signed the new log.
I kept the cache container and reused it for one of my own caches.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.