17-Okay, butRR doesn'tactually try toprovide lists notbased onratings30-Using medianinstead of mean ina system with abias factor of 20xmakes perfectsense4-okay, but once it'simplemented, it'd bea fool-proof way toprevent drive-byratings. Users wouldabsolutely not dotheir best to bypass it29-Drive-byratings onlyaffect my fictionand therefore it'san unequalcontest15-It's RR'sfault thatgetting tractionas a newauthor is hard9-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders12-It is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views20-okay, butthere is onlybias whentalking aboutratings lessthan 3 stars11-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions8-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors18-A 0.5star ratingis neverjustifiable22-You canevaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback27-What do you meanreaders would justraise the bar? That'sabsolutely not how itworks, that's why usersdraw the line at theneutral unbiased meanof 2.75 stars5-Remindingreaders to rate orreview would leadto an objectivelybetter ratingsystem14-Giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience3-okay, but it'dbe trivial toweigh ratingsbased on atleast the first 10chapter reads16-Ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists24-okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback28-Removingsome toppercentile ofratings totallymakes sense"1-Ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at23-okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback21-Negativefeedback isinherentlybad25-Everyonehaving lessnegative ratingswould improveeveryone'srankings"7-We needmore fivestar ratings2-The number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is26-okay, buthaving lessnegative ratingswould make it sousers give morestories a chance6-The ratingsystem behavesdifferently from abinary ratingsystemmathematically13-Having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading10-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings19-There isonly biaswhen talkingabout 0.5star ratings17-Okay, butRR doesn'tactually try toprovide lists notbased onratings30-Using medianinstead of mean ina system with abias factor of 20xmakes perfectsense4-okay, but once it'simplemented, it'd bea fool-proof way toprevent drive-byratings. Users wouldabsolutely not dotheir best to bypass it29-Drive-byratings onlyaffect my fictionand therefore it'san unequalcontest15-It's RR'sfault thatgetting tractionas a newauthor is hard9-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders12-It is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views20-okay, butthere is onlybias whentalking aboutratings lessthan 3 stars11-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions8-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors18-A 0.5star ratingis neverjustifiable22-You canevaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback27-What do you meanreaders would justraise the bar? That'sabsolutely not how itworks, that's why usersdraw the line at theneutral unbiased meanof 2.75 stars5-Remindingreaders to rate orreview would leadto an objectivelybetter ratingsystem14-Giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience3-okay, but it'dbe trivial toweigh ratingsbased on atleast the first 10chapter reads16-Ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists24-okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback28-Removingsome toppercentile ofratings totallymakes sense"1-Ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at23-okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback21-Negativefeedback isinherentlybad25-Everyonehaving lessnegative ratingswould improveeveryone'srankings"7-We needmore fivestar ratings2-The number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is26-okay, buthaving lessnegative ratingswould make it sousers give morestories a chance6-The ratingsystem behavesdifferently from abinary ratingsystemmathematically13-Having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading10-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings19-There isonly biaswhen talkingabout 0.5star ratings

Royal Road Review Rationales v2 - 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
27
28
29
30
  1. 17-Okay, but RR doesn't actually try to provide lists not based on ratings
  2. 30-Using median instead of mean in a system with a bias factor of 20x makes perfect sense
  3. 4-okay, but once it's implemented, it'd be a fool-proof way to prevent drive-by ratings. Users would absolutely not do their best to bypass it
  4. 29-Drive-by ratings only affect my fiction and therefore it's an unequal contest
  5. 15-It's RR's fault that getting traction as a new author is hard
  6. 9-Removing ratings completely is beneficial to readers
  7. 12-It is a bad thing that higher ranked fictions get more views
  8. 20-okay, but there is only bias when talking about ratings less than 3 stars
  9. 11-You can give ideal personalised suggestions
  10. 8-Removing ratings completely is beneficial to authors
  11. 18-A 0.5 star rating is never justifiable
  12. 22-You can evaluate subjective quality/suitability based only on positive feedback
  13. 27-What do you mean readers would just raise the bar? That's absolutely not how it works, that's why users draw the line at the neutral unbiased mean of 2.75 stars
  14. 5-Reminding readers to rate or review would lead to an objectively better rating system
  15. 14-Giving readers reading suggestions irrespective of other readers opinions does not result in a worse experience
  16. 3-okay, but it'd be trivial to weigh ratings based on at least the first 10 chapter reads
  17. 16-Ratings affect visibility on all lists
  18. 24-okay, but authors would never abuse it to create an unequal situation by using varying levels of aggressive tactics to coerce feedback
  19. 28-Removing some top percentile of ratings totally makes sense"
  20. 1-Ratings under 4 stars mean death because that's what the users decided to draw the line at
  21. 23-okay, but you can objectively evaluate it based on the percentage of readers willing to give positive feedback
  22. 21-Negative feedback is inherently bad
  23. 25-Everyone having less negative ratings would improve everyone's rankings"
  24. 7-We need more five star ratings
  25. 2-The number of chapters read is linearly proportional with how well-formed a readers opinion is
  26. 26-okay, but having less negative ratings would make it so users give more stories a chance
  27. 6-The rating system behaves differently from a binary rating system mathematically
  28. 13-Having a low average rating means readers dismiss my novel then they go do something else other than reading
  29. 10-You can give ideal personalised suggestions without ratings
  30. 19-There is only bias when talking about 0.5 star ratings