Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

User avatar
KibblesAndVick
Posts: 541
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 5:29 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby KibblesAndVick » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:09 pm


User avatar
380yarddrives
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:45 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby 380yarddrives » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:10 pm

I'm sorry, but you have no chance on this one. I'd like to know how many words were used on the entire test that may have more than one meaning. If you can't determine the use of a word in that case you don't deserve to get the correct answer anyway.

Just live with it.

User avatar
citrustang
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby citrustang » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:13 pm

FuManChusco wrote:Thank you for posting this. I've been trying to find out the answer to the history of omitting question. Every argument for both sides is basically meaningless. LSAC will not omit this game. People probably misunderstood it. Omitting it would reward those who would have gotten them wrong regardless, and it punishes people who actually answered them correctly. Maybe this is not a good reason to withhold from writing to LSAC, but it's a damn good reason for not omitting the game.

This thread is not a petition for LSAC to remove the game. This thread is meant to serve only three functions: to help people identify a situation they may have encountered during the test, to inform them of how they can contact the LSAC regarding the nature of that situation, and to encourage them to do so.

If you trust the LSAC did not make a mistake on the test, then you can trust they will deny these submitted challenges. Personal attacks are unnecessary.

mges
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 8:34 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby mges » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:15 pm

FuManChusco... does it make you feel better to be a know-it-all who attacks people? If so, I feel bad for you. If not, change your attitude.

User avatar
FuManChusco
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:56 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby FuManChusco » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:27 pm

mges wrote:FuManChusco... does it make you feel better to be a know-it-all who attacks people? If so, I feel bad for you. If not, change your attitude.


I'm not a know-it-all by any means. I certainly didn't get a 180. I usually offer advice on these boards and am generally a nice guy. This is one of the exceptions to the rule, because I think the definition of the term was common sense and you'd have to be a fool to a.) misread that term, and b.) think LSAC is actually going to give a shit.

There's probably a thousand words on the LSAT that could be taken to mean 2 different things. As far as I know there are plenty of words with multiple definitions. Maybe I sound like an asshole, but it is not LSAC's fault that you didn't know what a word meant. It was pretty simple.

User avatar
citrustang
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby citrustang » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:34 pm

FuManChusco wrote:I'm not a know-it-all by any means. I certainly didn't get a 180. I usually offer advice on these boards and am generally a nice guy. This is one of the exceptions to the rule, because I think the definition of the term was common sense and you'd have to be a fool to a.) misread that term, and b.) think LSAC is actually going to give a shit.

There's probably a thousand words on the LSAT that could be taken to mean 2 different things. As far as I know there are plenty of words with multiple definitions. Maybe I sound like an asshole, but it is not LSAC's fault that you didn't know what a word meant. It was pretty simple.


Do you mean to say you feel justified in belittling and acting condescending toward those who may disagree with you?

I'm not sure I've done anything to deserve that kind of response.

kelsey89
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:42 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby kelsey89 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:37 pm

FuManChusco wrote:
mges wrote:FuManChusco... does it make you feel better to be a know-it-all who attacks people? If so, I feel bad for you. If not, change your attitude.


I'm not a know-it-all by any means. I certainly didn't get a 180. I usually offer advice on these boards and am generally a nice guy. This is one of the exceptions to the rule, because I think the definition of the term was common sense and you'd have to be a fool to a.) misread that term, and b.) think LSAC is actually going to give a shit.

There's probably a thousand words on the LSAT that could be taken to mean 2 different things. As far as I know there are plenty of words with multiple definitions. Maybe I sound like an asshole, but it is not LSAC's fault that you didn't know what a word meant. It was pretty simple.




+1trillion

User avatar
suspicious android
Posts: 938
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby suspicious android » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:38 pm

I don't think the wording was really ambiguous, but it was annoying. I'd be willing to wager money that nothing will be removed from scoring on this test. However, the thing I don't understand, is why so many of the anti-ambiguity people are being such assholes about this. I think Citrusang has done a pretty good job sticking to his relatively modest claims in the face of a lot of bullshit personal attacks.

User avatar
citrustang
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby citrustang » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:45 pm

suspicious android wrote:I don't think the wording was really ambiguous, but it was annoying. I'd be willing to wager money that nothing will be removed from scoring on this test. However, the thing I don't understand, is why so many of the anti-ambiguity people are being such assholes about this. I think Citrusang has done a pretty good job sticking to his relatively modest claims in the face of a lot of bullshit personal attacks.


Thanks. I may not be right, and I'm not in a position to tell others they are wrong. But if there was any ambiguity, even the tiniest bit, that may have affected the LG in question, then I think people are justified in submitting official challenges to the LSAC.

User avatar
FuManChusco
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:56 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby FuManChusco » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:52 pm

citrustang wrote:
FuManChusco wrote:I'm not a know-it-all by any means. I certainly didn't get a 180. I usually offer advice on these boards and am generally a nice guy. This is one of the exceptions to the rule, because I think the definition of the term was common sense and you'd have to be a fool to a.) misread that term, and b.) think LSAC is actually going to give a shit.

There's probably a thousand words on the LSAT that could be taken to mean 2 different things. As far as I know there are plenty of words with multiple definitions. Maybe I sound like an asshole, but it is not LSAC's fault that you didn't know what a word meant. It was pretty simple.


Do you mean to say you feel justified in belittling and acting condescending toward those who may disagree with you?

I'm not sure I've done anything to deserve that kind of response.


Yes, I do feel that everything I wrote is justified. I wouldn't have submitted it if I didn't. If you think I was belittling or condescending, then so be it. That is how I feel.

User avatar
pinkzeppelin
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby pinkzeppelin » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:52 pm

suspicious android wrote:I don't think the wording was really ambiguous, but it was annoying. I'd be willing to wager money that nothing will be removed from scoring on this test. However, the thing I don't understand, is why so many of the anti-ambiguity people are being such assholes about this. I think Citrusang has done a pretty good job sticking to his relatively modest claims in the face of a lot of bullshit personal attacks.


I think a lot of posters hate people who blame others for all their problems. When you claim that your failure on part of the test was due to the LSAC and absolve yourself of any responsibility, people will look down on you. And frankly, you don't deserve any respect if you're not mature enough to take responsibility for your own failures.

User avatar
FuManChusco
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:56 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby FuManChusco » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:57 pm

pinkzeppelin wrote:
suspicious android wrote:I don't think the wording was really ambiguous, but it was annoying. I'd be willing to wager money that nothing will be removed from scoring on this test. However, the thing I don't understand, is why so many of the anti-ambiguity people are being such assholes about this. I think Citrusang has done a pretty good job sticking to his relatively modest claims in the face of a lot of bullshit personal attacks.


I think a lot of posters hate people who blame others for all their problems. When you claim that your failure on part of the test was due to the LSAC and absolve yourself of any responsibility, people will look down on you. And frankly, you don't deserve any respect if you're not mature enough to take responsibility for your own failures.


+1. Couldn't have said it better myself. I actually tried, but I just came off sounding like a dick.

Kobe_Teeth
Posts: 964
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 1:40 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby Kobe_Teeth » Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:57 pm

Citrustang's new avatar...

Image

...stick an orange in there if you want.

User avatar
FuManChusco
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:56 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby FuManChusco » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:00 pm

nice, Kobe. how about this one?
Image

d34d9823
Posts: 1915
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby d34d9823 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:02 pm

pinkzeppelin wrote:
suspicious android wrote:I don't think the wording was really ambiguous, but it was annoying. I'd be willing to wager money that nothing will be removed from scoring on this test. However, the thing I don't understand, is why so many of the anti-ambiguity people are being such assholes about this. I think Citrusang has done a pretty good job sticking to his relatively modest claims in the face of a lot of bullshit personal attacks.


I think a lot of posters hate people who blame others for all their problems. When you claim that your failure on part of the test was due to the LSAC and absolve yourself of any responsibility, people will look down on you. And frankly, you don't deserve any respect if you're not mature enough to take responsibility for your own failures.

He wouldn't have irritated me if it wasn't for his holier than thou attitude.

User avatar
truffleshuffle
Posts: 84
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 11:42 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby truffleshuffle » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:05 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:He wouldn't have irritated me if it wasn't for his holier than thou attitude.


Cirtustang reminded me of this, but now that someone else mentioned his "holier than thou attitude"...
http://abovethelaw.com/2010/04/smu-law- ... n-warrior/

That or its Jesse J. Clark trying to get into a ABA accredited school.

Kobe_Teeth
Posts: 964
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 1:40 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby Kobe_Teeth » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:06 pm

If Sasha Vujacic ever got to play anymore we could find a euro-trash version of this as well...then citrus could have his preference.

kelsey89
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:42 am

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby kelsey89 » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:12 pm

--ImageRemoved--

User avatar
nematoad
Posts: 421
Joined: Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:06 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby nematoad » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:15 pm

i think regardless of anything the fact that youve got the initiative to see this through is pretty cool. Even if nothing turns out, which most likely will be the case, you're doing big things just drafting this challenge. Big ups yo.

User avatar
scruffs mcguff
Posts: 304
Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2010 9:49 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby scruffs mcguff » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:21 pm

Kobe_Teeth wrote:If Sasha Vujacic ever got to play anymore we could find a euro-trash version of this as well...then citrus could have his preference.


Hey don't dog the machine.

User avatar
citrustang
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby citrustang » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:28 pm

pinkzeppelin wrote:
suspicious android wrote:I don't think the wording was really ambiguous, but it was annoying. I'd be willing to wager money that nothing will be removed from scoring on this test. However, the thing I don't understand, is why so many of the anti-ambiguity people are being such assholes about this. I think Citrusang has done a pretty good job sticking to his relatively modest claims in the face of a lot of bullshit personal attacks.


I think a lot of posters hate people who blame others for all their problems. When you claim that your failure on part of the test was due to the LSAC and absolve yourself of any responsibility, people will look down on you. And frankly, you don't deserve any respect if you're not mature enough to take responsibility for your own failures.


My performance on that LG has no bearing on the validity of a challenge. During the test, I recognized the incorrect interpretation made the game unworkable and was able to go back and make the necessary changes to answer the questions correctly. The issue being raised is one concerning language used on the test, not the perceived difficulty of the LG or any personal failures I need to come to terms with on my own time.

User avatar
citrustang
Posts: 110
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby citrustang » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:30 pm

d34dluk3 wrote:He wouldn't have irritated me if it wasn't for his holier than thou attitude.


I'm truly sorry I've come across that way.

User avatar
Marionberry
Posts: 1302
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 9:24 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby Marionberry » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:32 pm

The reason some people sound like dicks in this thread is that they're claiming that the reason people messed up that game is because they're "fools" or that they don't understand the english language. That's condescending, and pretty stupid itself. I messed up that game, I misinterpreted that rule. I don't think I did this because it was worded ambiguously, and I don't expect lsac to do anything about it. Its my mistake and I own it. Was I careless or did I fuck up up under pressure? Probably both. But to claim that a bunch of people, many of whom are 170+ pt'ers, messed it up because they are stupid is just wrong, and kind of dickish.

User avatar
pinkzeppelin
Posts: 232
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby pinkzeppelin » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:39 pm

You say:

citrustang wrote:My performance on that LG has no bearing on the validity of a challenge. During the test, I recognized the incorrect interpretation made the game unworkable and was able to go back and make the necessary changes to answer the questions correctly. The issue being raised is one concerning language used on the test, not the perceived difficulty of the LG or any personal failures I need to come to terms with on my own time.


I hear:

"I interpreted the wording incorrectly, but it isn't my fault. LSAC shouldn't have used such an ambiguous word."

Taking responsibility, you should say:

"I interpreted the wording incorrectly. It seems that most people were able to properly interpret the wording, perhaps I was out of focus or distracted. Next time, I need to pay more direct attention to the little details that the LSAT tests so I do not repeat the same mistake."

I don't get how you can say you aren't avoiding responsibility/sounding whiny.

User avatar
FuManChusco
Posts: 1217
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 8:56 pm

Re: Official challenge to the 4th game in the scored LG section

Postby FuManChusco » Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:43 pm

Marionberry wrote:The reason some people sound like dicks in this thread is that they're claiming that the reason people messed up that game is because they're "fools" or that they don't understand the english language. That's condescending, and pretty stupid itself. I messed up that game, I misinterpreted that rule. I don't think I did this because it was worded ambiguously, and I don't expect lsac to do anything about it. Its my mistake and I own it. Was I careless or did I fuck up up under pressure? Probably both. But to claim that a bunch of people, many of whom are 170+ pt'ers, messed it up because they are stupid is just wrong, and kind of dickish.


At least you have a mature outlook on the situation. Plenty of people in here sound whiny because they got the game wrong. In my opinion, misunderstanding that word was a foolish mistake, not a fault on the part of LSAC. If you make foolish mistakes, I have every right to call you a fool. I don't think I ever explicitly called someone stupid though.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], DumbHollywoodActor, Instrumental, tuesdayninja, Vino.Veritas, Yahoo [Bot] and 10 guests