(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
27
"okay, but having less negative ratings would make it so users give more stories a chance"
"ratings affect visibility on all lists"
"you can give ideal personalised suggestions without ratings"
"removing ratings completely is beneficial to authors"
"there is only bias when talking about 0.5 star ratings"
"a 0.5 star rating is never justifiable"
"it is a bad thing that higher ranked fictions get more views"
"okay, but you can objectively evaluate it based on the percentage of readers willing to give positive feedback"
"we need more five star ratings"
"giving readers reading suggestions irrespective of other readers opinions does not result in a worse experience"
"removing ratings completely is beneficial to readers"
"it's RR's fault that getting traction as a new author is hard"
“okay, but once it's implemented, it'd be a foolproof way to prevent drive-by ratings. Users would absolutely not do their best to bypass it"
"okay, but authors would never abuse it to create an unequal situation by using varying levels of aggressive tactics to coerce feedback"
"you can evaluate subjective quality/suitability based only on positive feedback"
"the number of chapters read is linearly proportional with how well-formed a readers opinion is"
“reminding readers to rate or review would lead to an objectively better rating system"
"the rating system behaves differently from a binary rating system mathematically"
"everyone having less negative ratings would improve everyone's rankings"
"ratings under 4 stars mean death because that's what the users decided to draw the line at"
"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"
"okay, but there is only bias when talking about ratings less than 3 stars"
"you can give ideal personalised suggestions"
"okay, but it'd be trivial to weigh ratings based on at least the first 10 chapter reads"
"having a low average rating means readers dismiss my novel then they go do something else other than reading"
"negative feedback is inherently bad"
"okay, but RR doesn't actually try to provide lists not based on ratings"
