"removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders""giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience""having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading""we needmore fivestarratings""you cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions"“reminding readersto rate or reviewwould lead to anobjectively betterrating system""okay, but thereis only biaswhen talkingabout ratingsless than 3stars""the number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is""it's RR's faultthat gettingtraction as anew author ishard""ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at""there is onlybias whentalking about0.5 starratings"Free!"what do you meanreaders would justraise the bar? That'sabsolutely not how itworks, that's how whyusers draw the line atthe neutral unbiasedmean of 2.75 stars""okay, but havingless negativeratings wouldmake it so usersgive more storiesa chance""it is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views""okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback""a 0.5 starrating isneverjustifiable""you can evaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback""ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists""removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors""okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback""you can giveidealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings""negativefeedback isinherentlybad""okay, but RRdoesn't actuallytry to providelists not basedon ratings""the rating systembehaves differentlyfrom a binaryrating systemmathematically""everyone havingless negativeratings wouldimproveeveryone'srankings""removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders""giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience""having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading""we needmore fivestarratings""you cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions"“reminding readersto rate or reviewwould lead to anobjectively betterrating system""okay, but thereis only biaswhen talkingabout ratingsless than 3stars""the number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is""it's RR's faultthat gettingtraction as anew author ishard""ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at""there is onlybias whentalking about0.5 starratings"Free!"what do you meanreaders would justraise the bar? That'sabsolutely not how itworks, that's how whyusers draw the line atthe neutral unbiasedmean of 2.75 stars""okay, but havingless negativeratings wouldmake it so usersgive more storiesa chance""it is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views""okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback""a 0.5 starrating isneverjustifiable""you can evaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback""ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists""removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors""okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback""you can giveidealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings""negativefeedback isinherentlybad""okay, but RRdoesn't actuallytry to providelists not basedon ratings""the rating systembehaves differentlyfrom a binaryrating systemmathematically""everyone havingless negativeratings wouldimproveeveryone'srankings"

Royal Road Review Rationality - Call List

(Print) Use this randomly generated list as your call list when playing the game. There is no need to say the BINGO column name. Place some kind of mark (like an X, a checkmark, a dot, tally mark, etc) on each cell as you announce it, to keep track. You can also cut out each item, place them in a bag and pull words from the bag.


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
  1. "removing ratings completely is beneficial to readers"
  2. "giving readers reading suggestions irrespective of other readers opinions does not result in a worse experience"
  3. "having a low average rating means readers dismiss my novel then they go do something else other than reading"
  4. "we need more five star ratings"
  5. "you can give ideal personalised suggestions"
  6. “reminding readers to rate or review would lead to an objectively better rating system"
  7. "okay, but there is only bias when talking about ratings less than 3 stars"
  8. "the number of chapters read is linearly proportional with how well-formed a readers opinion is"
  9. "it's RR's fault that getting traction as a new author is hard"
  10. "ratings under 4 stars mean death because that's what the users decided to draw the line at"
  11. "there is only bias when talking about 0.5 star ratings"
  12. Free!
  13. "what do you mean readers would just raise the bar? That's absolutely not how it works, that's how why users draw the line at the neutral unbiased mean of 2.75 stars"
  14. "okay, but having less negative ratings would make it so users give more stories a chance"
  15. "it is a bad thing that higher ranked fictions get more views"
  16. "okay, but authors would never abuse it to create an unequal situation by using varying levels of aggressive tactics to coerce feedback"
  17. "a 0.5 star rating is never justifiable"
  18. "you can evaluate subjective quality/suitability based only on positive feedback"
  19. "ratings affect visibility on all lists"
  20. "removing ratings completely is beneficial to authors"
  21. "okay, but you can objectively evaluate it based on the percentage of readers willing to give positive feedback"
  22. "you can give ideal personalised suggestions without ratings"
  23. "negative feedback is inherently bad"
  24. "okay, but RR doesn't actually try to provide lists not based on ratings"
  25. "the rating system behaves differently from a binary rating system mathematically"
  26. "everyone having less negative ratings would improve everyone's rankings"