Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Crazycall2
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:15 am

Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby Crazycall2 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:03 pm

I'm in the same boat as many of you with regard to the 4th game (i.e. I think it was worded ambiguously), and have just e-mailed and snail mailed my challenge letter. To those of you who sent yours earlier (or later for that matter):
Have you gotten any type of a response? Are you expecting one before scores are released?

Please keep us posted with updates to challenges in this thread.

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

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby FuManChusco » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:04 pm

Oh God.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18409
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby bk1 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:09 pm

I hear LSAC responds faster to smoke signals.

User avatar
balzern
Posts: 347
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 2:27 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby balzern » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:09 pm

I am sick of this thread and threads related to the game.

User avatar
taw856
Posts: 212
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:05 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby taw856 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:10 pm

I'm just waiting for the DF tells you whether or not you should challenge an LSAT question thread. :lol:

Crazycall2
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:15 am

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby Crazycall2 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:20 pm

If you haven't written to LSAC, then you don't need to update us here.

P.S.

6/10- Written Letter and E-mail Sent

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18409
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby bk1 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:23 pm

Crazycall2 wrote:If you haven't written to LSAC, then you don't need to update us here need to point out how these people are wrong.

jerome05
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 8:23 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby jerome05 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:25 pm

I sent an email yesterday afternoon, but haven't heard anything back... i'm wondering if i should also send a hard-copy also (?), but accordiing to the LSAC webpage, the email should be good enough

ive got a feeling that we'll get a generic letter next week politely telling us to f%&k off. I doubt antyhing significant is going to happen, but I'm hoping maybe they'll offer an opportunity to retest or somethign without this score or cancellation going on my record

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

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby FuManChusco » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:27 pm

bk1 wrote:
Crazycall2 wrote:If you haven't written to LSAC, then you don't need to update us here need to point out how these people are wrong.


Gold. I think we can get this one to 20 pages.

Crazycall2
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:15 am

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby Crazycall2 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:33 pm

bk1 wrote:
Crazycall2 wrote:If you haven't written to LSAC, then you don't need to update us here need to point out how these people are wrong.


There's already an 18 (and counting) page thread where you are welcome to do that. This is just to help those of us who have already decided to challenge keep track of the results.

Hey-O
Posts: 719
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:50 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby Hey-O » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:39 pm

I am not challenging but I can see the ambiguity. Good luck to those challenging. Although I don't think they'll change the test if you're lucky they might refund your money.

User avatar
Ragged
Posts: 1509
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 12:39 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby Ragged » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:39 pm

Haven't yet. But will before the week is up. Keep up the good fight brothers!

btw such letters might effect curve even if alittle so all you smart people who do not have problems interpreting english could benefit too unless you are sure you haven't missed a quesiton. so stop hating and back us up. :mrgreen:
Last edited by Ragged on Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18409
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby bk1 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:39 pm

Crazycall2 wrote:There's already an 18 (and counting) page thread where you are welcome to do that. This is just to help those of us who have already decided to challenge keep track of the results.


What results?

EDIT: Okay I'll leave this thread.

apropos
Posts: 70
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 11:28 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby apropos » Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:10 pm

Good idea. I plan to write something, but haven't yet. I'll update, and I appreciate that others will too.

raiser
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 1:32 am

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby raiser » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:35 am

I wrote in yesterday evening. In the meantime I have to cancel, 4-6 wrong is too big a swing at the top of the scale. Based on my previous score, 167, I can only equal or beat it by a point with a slightly generous curve.
I encourage everyone who was tripped up to write in. My feeling is this is a different sort of error than writing the rule's logic incorrectly (a->b vs b->a) more like (a->b vs c->d) The items in a relationship should not be in doubt.
I admit this is all based on memory and there could be a clarifying remark somewhere earlier in the question. As someone currently in software, that rule, as written, would be considered a bad specification.

schnoodle
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:57 am

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby schnoodle » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:53 am

can everyone who plans to use either "effect" or "affect" in a sentence please consult a dictionary before typing so (s)he no longer sounds like an idiot? thanks.

User avatar
BriaTharen
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:17 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby BriaTharen » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:17 am

taw856 wrote:I'm just waiting for the DF tells you whether or not you should challenge an LSAT question thread. :lol:


Waste of time

User avatar
taw856
Posts: 212
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:05 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby taw856 » Fri Jun 11, 2010 10:59 am

JessicaTiger wrote:
taw856 wrote:I'm just waiting for the DF tells you whether or not you should challenge an LSAT question thread. :lol:


Waste of time


There would be more pictures for entertainment value, at least. :lol:

User avatar
3|ink
Posts: 7331
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:23 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby 3|ink » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:06 am

schnoodle wrote:can everyone who plans to use either "effect" or "affect" in a sentence please consult a dictionary before typing so (s)he no longer sounds like an idiot? thanks.


WHAT AFFECT WOULD THAT HAVE?

/sarcasm

User avatar
trialjunky
Posts: 928
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:41 am

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby trialjunky » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:15 am

schnoodle wrote:can everyone who plans to use either "effect" or "affect" in a sentence please consult a dictionary before typing so (s)he no longer sounds like an idiot? thanks.


douchenoodle...no one comes here for grammer lessons.

Other ppl...

Someone throw up the letter they plan on sending/sent. What exactly are you telling them?

User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 5:59 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Fri Jun 11, 2010 11:20 am

I hate to say this but LSAC will probably not give a damn.
They meant to fuck people over with that question..here's to hopes that there is a somewhat generous curve though!

09042014
Posts: 18282
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:47 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby 09042014 » Fri Jun 11, 2010 12:04 pm

JessicaTiger wrote:
taw856 wrote:I'm just waiting for the DF tells you whether or not you should challenge an LSAT question thread. :lol:


Waste of time


DF says learn English. I barely speak it and I could understand the LSAT well enough.

schnoodle
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 7:57 am

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby schnoodle » Fri Jun 11, 2010 12:13 pm

trialjunky wrote:
schnoodle wrote:can everyone who plans to use either "effect" or "affect" in a sentence please consult a dictionary before typing so (s)he no longer sounds like an idiot? thanks.


douchenoodle...no one comes here for grammer lessons.

Other ppl...

Someone throw up the letter they plan on sending/sent. What exactly are you telling them?



Hey trial junky, it's spelled GRAMMAR. In case you were curious.

User avatar
BriaTharen
Posts: 750
Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 5:17 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby BriaTharen » Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:26 pm

taw856 wrote:
JessicaTiger wrote:
taw856 wrote:I'm just waiting for the DF tells you whether or not you should challenge an LSAT question thread. :lol:


Waste of time


There would be more pictures for entertainment value, at least. :lol:


Only memes- LSAT really isn't cause to picwhore

User avatar
dominkay
Posts: 355
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 4:41 pm

Re: Those who have written to challenge the 4th LG--replies?

Postby dominkay » Fri Jun 11, 2010 1:33 pm

Dr. Strangelove wrote:I hate to say this but LSAC will probably not give a damn.
They meant to fuck people over with that question..here's to hopes that there is a somewhat generous curve though!


Agree that they meant to fuck people over. LSAC is devious.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 34iplaw, dontsaywhatyoumean, Instrumental, PRinNYC, proteinshake, Yahoo [Bot] and 16 guests