I'll add to that, if I may, since two of mine have needed tweaking for the same reason: Unnecessary anagramming. I had a neat method, decent layout, but moderators wanted it redone so you can see you're on the right track as you solve it. So if your puzzle requires anagramming, maybe try tweaking it so it doesn't?

Just a thought.

Keep up the good work mods!

[1] Of course!!! I just rejected another one with gratuitous anagramming....
Thanks

"Gratuitous Anagramming"

That sounds like the name of a hip new band.

[3] And the word "TANGA" is buried in there - anagrammed of course :-)

I actually like anagramming, its just another step to the puzzle. Plus there are plenty of online sites that help with anagrams. Though maybe I'm the minority. But if a solution is fairly simple and clear or the word is short, I don't see a problem with angramming.

Now if there are 15 steps to arrive at each letter and then you have to anagram, I could see there being a problem.

[1] [5] I was also going to express a negative opinion about discouraging anagrams, but I think the key word is "gratuitous". If you can simply re-order your clues to avoid an anagram, and it won't change the puzzle, then generally you should.

But there are times when I think it's good to use an anagram. I've seen many puzzles where figuring out the first 2-3 letters and maybe applying the theme gave the entire answer away. It seems to me to lessen the challenge when you only need to solve a fraction of a puzzle to get the answer.

There are various things a puzzle author can try to do to avoid this, but sometimes the nature of a puzzle makes these methods difficult to use. So you may have to use anagramming as a last resort. (Pun unintended, but shnifty!)

I want to anagram Donimo's name ... I don't know how long I was on the site before I realized it wasn't Domino.

"Gratuitous Anagramming"? you mean like in tonight's EOWW? ;)

[8] Hear, hear! The dice could and should have been placed so that no anagramming was necessary, especially since the letters anagrammed to two common words.

[6] and [9] Exactly...if it can be arranged so no anagram is necessary, great. If it's just there due to laziness (guilty) retool it.

How long do you suppose it will be before someone comes up with a puzzle that has "gratuitous anagramming" as the answer?

[11] Go for it!

[11] just make sure you make it an anagram... :)

[11] [12] [13] I smell another contest in there...oh the gears are turning
...and ground to a halt! http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y203/steph_fro...

Go! Go! Go! C'mon, steph!!

Actually, I have a crypto done that fits this phrase, just didn't submit it yet. Guess I'll hold onto it until I see what steph comes up with!

Speaking of gratuitous anagramming: http://web.tanga.com/puzzles/1474-7-1-2008

- Requires uncommon knowledge with no clue on how or where to find/research the information

I've seen way too many sports answers or images to say that this is legitimate.

[17] note the caveat "— These are not necessarily the opinions of all the moderators"

I will bounce puzzles that have unclued sports answers or images

[18] Caveat noted. Thanks.

I just had what I thought was an original idea rejected based on solid reasons from a well respected mod. However, in the review they offered not just "fixes" or recommendations, but completely rewrote the puzzle. I know this was just a way for them to say, "Here's a way to make an OK idea excellent" but it doesn't feel like mine anymore.

This isn't a problem really, it just bummed me out. Is there a way to request comments like "Select a new background, closer to the theme" instead of "Use this link to a shot of people talking" Or "Try to clean up the final result, perhaps different letters?" instead of "Use this list"?

I am more than humble that this particular mod chose to take the time to research and modify my idea into what I'm sure they would like to see on the site. I'm still debating whether to make the suggested changes or start over using the intent of the mod.

PS - It was not "Gratuitous Anagramming" that one has yet to get tweaked.

[20]
If you don't feel the puzzle is yours anymore, I would suggest trying to look at the underlying problems the mod was pointing out, and try to deal with them in your own way - and continue discussions with the moderator.

I find that my moderation comments run the gamut from vague recommendations to more specific and pointed suggestions. I don't take offense when a puzzle maker doesn't make the changes the way I suggested. However, If I feel that the changes don't fix the underlying problems, or bring up more - I will reopen the dialog with the puzzle maker.

I'll have to go look for the "Gratuitous Anagramming" one :-)

I recently had a puzzle rejected because it was too similar to a prior puzzle. I was a bit bummed. There is no way to search puzzles for a subject having been done before. Apparently I did not see it before or did not recall it having been done before. My submission was a cryptopix and the prior use was in a hypercross.
I guess the moral is to try to avoid duplication whenever possible!