6-The ratingsystem behavesdifferently from abinary ratingsystemmathematically26-okay, buthaving lessnegative ratingswould make it sousers give morestories a chance23-okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback8-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors27-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 stars12-It is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views1-Ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at11-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions7-We needmore fivestar ratings29-Drive-byratings onlyaffect my fictionand therefore it'san unequalcontest18-A 0.5star ratingis neverjustifiable16-Ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists10-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings13-Having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading19-There isonly biaswhen talkingabout 0.5star ratings2-The number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is21-Negativefeedback isinherentlybad9-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders30-Using medianinstead of mean ina system with abias factor of 20xmakes perfectsense15-It's RR'sfault thatgetting tractionas a newauthor is hard17-Okay, butRR doesn'tactually try toprovide lists notbased onratings14-Giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience20-okay, butthere is onlybias whentalking aboutratings lessthan 3 stars25-Everyonehaving lessnegative ratingswould improveeveryone'srankings"28-Removingsome toppercentile ofratings totallymakes sense"24-okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback3-okay, but it'dbe trivial toweigh ratingsbased on atleast the first 10chapter reads4-okay, but once it'simplemented, it'd bea fool-proof way toprevent drive-byratings. Users wouldabsolutely not dotheir best to bypass it5-Remindingreaders to rate orreview would leadto an objectivelybetter ratingsystem22-You canevaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback6-The ratingsystem behavesdifferently from abinary ratingsystemmathematically26-okay, buthaving lessnegative ratingswould make it sousers give morestories a chance23-okay, but you canobjectively evaluate itbased on thepercentage ofreaders willing to givepositive feedback8-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toauthors27-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 stars12-It is a badthing thathigher rankedfictions getmore views1-Ratings under 4stars mean deathbecause that'swhat the usersdecided to drawthe line at11-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestions7-We needmore fivestar ratings29-Drive-byratings onlyaffect my fictionand therefore it'san unequalcontest18-A 0.5star ratingis neverjustifiable16-Ratingsaffectvisibility onall lists10-You cangive idealpersonalisedsuggestionswithout ratings13-Having a lowaverage ratingmeans readersdismiss my novelthen they go dosomething else otherthan reading19-There isonly biaswhen talkingabout 0.5star ratings2-The number ofchapters read islinearlyproportional withhow well-formed areaders opinion is21-Negativefeedback isinherentlybad9-Removingratingscompletely isbeneficial toreaders30-Using medianinstead of mean ina system with abias factor of 20xmakes perfectsense15-It's RR'sfault thatgetting tractionas a newauthor is hard17-Okay, butRR doesn'tactually try toprovide lists notbased onratings14-Giving readersreading suggestionsirrespective of otherreaders opinionsdoes not result in aworse experience20-okay, butthere is onlybias whentalking aboutratings lessthan 3 stars25-Everyonehaving lessnegative ratingswould improveeveryone'srankings"28-Removingsome toppercentile ofratings totallymakes sense"24-okay, but authorswould never abuse itto create an unequalsituation by usingvarying levels ofaggressive tactics tocoerce feedback3-okay, but it'dbe trivial toweigh ratingsbased on atleast the first 10chapter reads4-okay, but once it'simplemented, it'd bea fool-proof way toprevent drive-byratings. Users wouldabsolutely not dotheir best to bypass it5-Remindingreaders to rate orreview would leadto an objectivelybetter ratingsystem22-You canevaluatesubjectivequality/suitabilitybased only onpositive feedback

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