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

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