Streamlining challenge cache submissions

[+barefootjeff]

The week before last I submitted a challenge cache, but it seems our normal state reviewer is on leave and I was told that, because of the extra time challenges take to review, I'm going to have to wait until the rest of the backlog is cleared. That's fine, but it led me to wonder whether there's anything, beyond the obvious like having a PGC checker and a challenge that meets the new guidelines, anything that reviewers would like to see on the cache page or in the reviewer note that'll streamline the process and make their job easier. In particular, under the present circumstances here, I'd like to avoid if I can any back-and-forth with the reviewer that'll slow the process down even further.

As well as the usual permission info and photos of the container and hiding place, I've also provided the number of qualifying caches Australia-wide, within 100km of GZ and within 25km of GZ, a screenshot of my checker output verifying that I qualify, a list of ten cachers within the likely catchment area who already qualify and a few who are close, but is there anything else that might help?

[Keystone]

Actually, your post outlines an ideal process for submitting a challenge cache.  I looked at your cache page and really liked your reviewer note with expanded background information.  Your challenge design qualifies under the 2016 guidelines.  I am quite sure that the delay is solely due to the reviewer's holiday as explained to you.

Every time you link to one of your caches, it makes me want to return to Australia!

[+barefootjeff]

3 minutes ago, Keystone said:

Actually, your post outlines an ideal process for submitting a challenge cache.  I looked at your cache page and really liked your reviewer note with expanded background information.  Your challenge design qualifies under the 2016 guidelines.  I am quite sure that the delay is solely due to the reviewer's holiday as explained to you.

Every time you link to one of your caches, it makes me want to return to Australia!

Thanks, good to know I haven't missed anything obvious. I'm content to wait under the circumstances (sadly it's not a holiday for our reviewer) but just wanted to circumvent any avoidable further delay.

[Keystone]

Oh! I am sorry to hear that.  I recently enjoyed working with your local reviewer on publishing the pair of multicaches that require cooperation between geocachers in Pittsburgh and Sydney. 

I did think of one small detail after I posted.  If there was any discussion in the Project-GC challenge checker forum about the design of your checker or the requirements for your challenge, include a link to that forum thread in your initial reviewer note.  The checker authors and taggers are very, very good at knowing which challenges are likely to make the grade and which will be shot down.  They perform a valuable first screening role that makes reviewers' lives much easier.

[+barefootjeff]

2 minutes ago, Keystone said:

Oh! I am sorry to hear that.  I recently enjoyed working with your local reviewer on publishing the pair of multicaches that require cooperation between geocachers in Pittsburgh and Sydney. 

I did think of one small detail after I posted.  If there was any discussion in the Project-GC challenge checker forum about the design of your checker or the requirements for your challenge, include a link to that forum thread in your initial reviewer note.  The checker authors and taggers are very, very good at knowing which challenges are likely to make the grade and which will be shot down.  They perform a valuable first screening role that makes reviewers' lives much easier.

The checker creation went through without any discussion - I just requested the checker and a few hours later I had it, it was just a matter of tagging one of their existing generic scripts, but I've now included the link anyway.

[+barefootjeff]

Thanks Keystone for your suggestions. The cache was just published without any drama .