So, cacher A places a cache but there's a problem with it. Suppose he put in a pocket knife, which he wasn't supposed to do, but everything else about the cache is OK. All he needs to do is to go back and remove the knife in order to have his cache published. Cacher B places a cache 50' away the next day not knowing about the other cache. You're saying cacher B should get the spot instead of cacher A?
Now suppose cacher A doesn't get back to his cache for (some arbitrary time period). Cacher B contacts the reviewer. The reviewer contacts cacher A who says he just can't get out there to fix the problem. The reviewer publishes cache B instead of cache A.
Where's the problem?
If cacher A put the knife in the cache then it means that he either didn't read the guidelines or chose not to follow them. IMO, that cache should be taken out of the queue completely and have to be resubmitted by the owner after he fixes the problem.
It is obvious to anyone who has read the rules that it is truly foolish to place certain items in a cache. Cacher A acted with undue haste in placing the cache without first engaging brain. Cacher B placed a cache having previously considered such factors as location and contents.
It would be excessively harsh to remove cache A from the queue completely but it should, IMHO, be moved to the back of the queue. If cache B were then found to have a flaw, it would be moved behind cache A.
The very fact that this system would cause inconvenience to those who cock up is its advantage.