I've noticed something about geocaching etiquette that irks me.  People
aren't considerate enough to log on the website when they couldn't find a
cache.

Example:  Rancho in Gilbert.  I was the last to find it on 11/24.  Atlas
tried to find it on 12/26 and couldn't find it so he logged a "can't find"
log.  His was the first log entered since my find on 11/24.  There's no way
he's been the first person to attempt to find this cache since 11/24 as it's
an easy access urban park cache.  It seems obvious that other geocachers
have looked for it, not found it, and not been considerate enough to post a
"can't find" log.

It's my belief that the "can't find" logs are there to be useful to people.
It notifies other geocachers that perhaps the cache isn't there.  It also
notifies the person who placed the cache that he/she should probably go
check on it.  Geocachers should be considerate to others and post a "can't
find" or "note" log when they don't find the cache.  It helps us all.

I'm wondering if people have egos and don't want anyone seeing a "can't
find" by their name.

My practice is as follows:  If I make an attempt and am not able to get to
the cache site, I post the experience as a "note."  If I get to the location
and just can't find the cache, then I post the experience as a "can't find"
log.  If I go back later and find the cache, I'll change my previous "can't
find" log to a "note" log (copy/delete/paste as new log).  And, if I can't
find a cache and the owner confirms that it's been liberated and archives
it, I'll delete my "can't find" log.  (Although the Snaptek statistics don't
properly work in this instance.)

In San Diego this past weekend, I found the same experience with the lack of
"can't find" logs.  There were 5 caches I looked for and couldn't find, yet
they were in very easy accessible places with the most recent log being 2
months ago.

srdrake