3-okay, but it'dbe trivial toweigh ratingsbased on atleast the first 10chapter reads11-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions15-It's RR'sfault thatgetting tractionas a newauthor is hard13-Having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading30-Using medianinstead of mean ina system with abias factor of 20xmakes perfectsense2-The number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is7-We needmore fivestar ratings23-okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback10-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings1-Ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at5-Remindingreaders to rate orreview would leadto an objectivelybetter ratingsystem19-There isonly biaswhen talkingabout 0.5star ratings26-okay, buthaving lessnegative ratingswould make it sousers give morestories a chance6-The ratingsystem behavesdifferently from abinary ratingsystemmathematically16-Ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists20-okay, butthere is onlybias whentalking aboutratings lessthan 3 stars12-It is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views28-Removingsome toppercentile ofratings totallymakes sense"24-okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback14-Giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience29-Drive-byratings onlyaffect my fictionand therefore it'san unequalcontest9-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders17-Okay, butRR doesn'tactually try toprovide lists notbased onratings4-okay, but once it'simplemented, it'd bea fool-proof way toprevent drive-byratings. Users wouldabsolutely not dotheir best to bypass it8-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors21-Negativefeedback isinherentlybad27-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 stars25-Everyonehaving lessnegative ratingswould improveeveryone'srankings"22-You canevaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback18-A 0.5star ratingis neverjustifiable3-okay, but it'dbe trivial toweigh ratingsbased on atleast the first 10chapter reads11-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions15-It's RR'sfault thatgetting tractionas a newauthor is hard13-Having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading30-Using medianinstead of mean ina system with abias factor of 20xmakes perfectsense2-The number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is7-We needmore fivestar ratings23-okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback10-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings1-Ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at5-Remindingreaders to rate orreview would leadto an objectivelybetter ratingsystem19-There isonly biaswhen talkingabout 0.5star ratings26-okay, buthaving lessnegative ratingswould make it sousers give morestories a chance6-The ratingsystem behavesdifferently from abinary ratingsystemmathematically16-Ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists20-okay, butthere is onlybias whentalking aboutratings lessthan 3 stars12-It is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views28-Removingsome toppercentile ofratings totallymakes sense"24-okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback14-Giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience29-Drive-byratings onlyaffect my fictionand therefore it'san unequalcontest9-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders17-Okay, butRR doesn'tactually try toprovide lists notbased onratings4-okay, but once it'simplemented, it'd bea fool-proof way toprevent drive-byratings. Users wouldabsolutely not dotheir best to bypass it8-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors21-Negativefeedback isinherentlybad27-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 stars25-Everyonehaving lessnegative ratingswould improveeveryone'srankings"22-You canevaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback18-A 0.5star ratingis neverjustifiable

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