9-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders25-Everyonehaving lessnegative ratingswould improveeveryone'srankings"21-Negativefeedback isinherentlybad7-We needmore fivestar ratings23-okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback22-You canevaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback15-It's RR'sfault thatgetting tractionas a newauthor is hard12-It is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views2-The number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is26-okay, buthaving lessnegative ratingswould make it sousers give morestories a chance16-Ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists6-The ratingsystem behavesdifferently from abinary ratingsystemmathematically30-Using medianinstead of mean ina system with abias factor of 20xmakes perfectsense13-Having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading19-There isonly biaswhen talkingabout 0.5star ratings29-Drive-byratings onlyaffect my fictionand therefore it'san unequalcontest4-okay, but once it'simplemented, it'd bea fool-proof way toprevent drive-byratings. Users wouldabsolutely not dotheir best to bypass it10-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings20-okay, butthere is onlybias whentalking aboutratings lessthan 3 stars11-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions5-Remindingreaders to rate orreview would leadto an objectivelybetter ratingsystem1-Ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at8-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors24-okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback17-Okay, butRR doesn'tactually try toprovide lists notbased onratings3-okay, but it'dbe trivial toweigh ratingsbased on atleast the first 10chapter reads18-A 0.5star ratingis neverjustifiable28-Removingsome toppercentile ofratings totallymakes sense"14-Giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience27-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 stars9-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders25-Everyonehaving lessnegative ratingswould improveeveryone'srankings"21-Negativefeedback isinherentlybad7-We needmore fivestar ratings23-okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback22-You canevaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback15-It's RR'sfault thatgetting tractionas a newauthor is hard12-It is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views2-The number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is26-okay, buthaving lessnegative ratingswould make it sousers give morestories a chance16-Ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists6-The ratingsystem behavesdifferently from abinary ratingsystemmathematically30-Using medianinstead of mean ina system with abias factor of 20xmakes perfectsense13-Having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading19-There isonly biaswhen talkingabout 0.5star ratings29-Drive-byratings onlyaffect my fictionand therefore it'san unequalcontest4-okay, but once it'simplemented, it'd bea fool-proof way toprevent drive-byratings. Users wouldabsolutely not dotheir best to bypass it10-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings20-okay, butthere is onlybias whentalking aboutratings lessthan 3 stars11-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions5-Remindingreaders to rate orreview would leadto an objectivelybetter ratingsystem1-Ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at8-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors24-okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback17-Okay, butRR doesn'tactually try toprovide lists notbased onratings3-okay, but it'dbe trivial toweigh ratingsbased on atleast the first 10chapter reads18-A 0.5star ratingis neverjustifiable28-Removingsome toppercentile ofratings totallymakes sense"14-Giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience27-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 stars

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