Some type of player rating is huge. The number of people how bid for a spot in a game only to go 'radio silent' is, for lack of a better term, insulting. I realize it will be a difficult thing to police, but without it, I don't have the confidence to remain a customer.

The problem discussed is HUGE, and makes me question getting involved in any new game, as I work to create a dynamic character with a deep background, prepare to roll out a developed story, only to have half of the players, or the narrator her/himself, bail. And if I am greatly hesitant to get involved in new games, then I will be leaving Storium.

I believe that ratings should cover more than this, though this issue is the largest. Combine this with a Story Points system, which would allow a Narrator to reward particularly great contributions from players. To avoid runaway inflation in this system, a narrator is given only enough points per game to award 2 points per player who stay until the end, which is when they are given out (perhaps increasing the number of points possible if the game lasts more than 10 scenes—so 2 points per surviving player times the number of decade scenes). Narrators should be judged on help for the players, attendance (sounds like kindergarden, oh well), and the creativity of the overall storytelling laid out by them.

Agree. At present there is no comeback on serial bailers. It might also make people think twice about overcommitting themselves.

To give a rating system some structure, certain categories should be addressed by all, such as attentiveness (participating in a timely manner) and creativity. One can find the games that a narrator/player was involved in (or, at least the present ones), but links provided in the rating system would be best, for the reasons that Haystack pointed towards. Nothing will kill interest in Storium faster than a reputation for games that die midway. Accountability will greatly help in bringing that problem under control. Also, when problems develop during a game, there should be elements in place to deal with them, as well as guidelines that should be read by all before joining.

I believe that some system is required. When I glance around Storium already I can see a fair number of games that have ground to a halt. Either players left or the narrator stopped updating the game. The system needs to be better or people will waste countless hours contributing to a game that just ends up hanging.

I agree with Haystack's comments. It could lead to situations where a player was in multiple games with a narrator that caused a situation in which the player was bullied/attacked. The player leaves, the narrator gives them negative feedback and then the player looks bad. Too dangerous...unless, like eBay, the player gets a rebuttal comment.

Player-to-player feedback systems could lead to ugliness. It might be enough to have a link to public games that the person has participated in, so you could look through their posts and draw your own conclusions.

I anticipate wanting narrators to be able to, like, thumbs up or thumbs down their players per game as an indication of their having contributed to a game / behaved poorly. Vice versa for players to rate narrators, to be fair. This in the hope that a running count of thumbs will maintain a sense of accountability and warn people away from accepting applications from serial pests and game ditchers.