Post removed.

dosto
Posts: 784
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:50 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby dosto » Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:14 pm

.
Last edited by dosto on Fri Sep 04, 2015 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
koalacity
Posts: 1162
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:56 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby koalacity » Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:18 pm

dosto wrote:
taylorswiftfan wrote:For test day...

When we write the certification/certifying statement right before we start the exam on test day, does it matter if the certifying statement is in print or in script/cursive? I was listening to the 7sage video and he goes over the instructions the proctors will give during the exam, and they say you cannot print when writing the certifying statement. I am not sure if I should write in print or in script/cursive handwriting. . . which one are we supposed to write in?


Cursive.

Odd-I printed, and it didn't appear to cause any issues. I was worried about having to write in cursive (because lolwhatscursive), so I read the instructions closely, and nowhere do they say you have to write in cursive.

User avatar
retaking23
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:34 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby retaking23 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:20 pm

Why have I suddenly started panicking?

dosto
Posts: 784
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:50 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby dosto » Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:22 pm

.
Last edited by dosto on Fri Sep 04, 2015 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bombaysippin
Posts: 1977
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:11 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby bombaysippin » Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:25 pm

There were conflicts about this during my October exam. Proctor was like just write it and some people were like does it have to be in cursive? Proctor was like uhh...just do whatever. Everyone was like.....

Lol.

User avatar
koalacity
Posts: 1162
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 9:56 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby koalacity » Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:26 pm

dosto wrote:
koalacity wrote:
dosto wrote:
Cursive.

Odd-I printed, and it didn't appear to cause any issues. I was worried about having to write in cursive (because lolwhatscursive), so I read the instructions closely, and nowhere do they say you have to write in cursive.


Eh, I ultimately don't think it matters but why take the risk. If it says "write" as opposed to "print" and proctors instruct not to print, then I'd play it safe.

Yeah, I mean, I would've done cursive if the proctors had specified-mine didn't, but others might.

chizzy
Posts: 551
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2013 5:07 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby chizzy » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:03 pm

i'm probably not going to be on tls tomorrow, but goodluck everyone! we have come this far. . you have put in COUNTLESS amount of hours to study for this test so pls pls don't ever doubt yourself that you're not prepared.

PS: whoever is done with their exam first should go ahead and make the december waitings thread :)

User avatar
Hotguy
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:33 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby Hotguy » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:05 pm

Fuck cursive. I don't even know how to write that shit anymore lol would take 3hours to write that sentence properly if I tried.

Thorcogan
Posts: 101
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:50 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby Thorcogan » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:07 pm

"Cursive". Meaning that you write normally, then just attach each letter to the following one with a line at the bottom of the letters :)

User avatar
Hotguy
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:33 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby Hotguy » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:09 pm

Thorcogan wrote:"Cursive". Meaning that you write normally, then just attach each letter to the following one with a line at the bottom of the letters :)

Lmao

062914123
Posts: 1846
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:11 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby 062914123 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:19 pm

.
Last edited by 062914123 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bombaysippin
Posts: 1977
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:11 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby bombaysippin » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:31 pm

Anyone ever write the all important writing section in cursive? 8)

User avatar
CookieDough
Posts: 404
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby CookieDough » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:33 pm

Bajam wrote:Anyone ever write the all important writing section in cursive? 8)


I did, but that's just how I write :)

dosto
Posts: 784
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:50 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby dosto » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:33 pm

.
Last edited by dosto on Fri Sep 04, 2015 3:26 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Hotguy
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:33 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby Hotguy » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:33 pm

Bajam wrote:Anyone ever write the all important writing section in cursive? 8)

180 idea. That way, you will give them even more reasons not to read it.

User avatar
snagglepuss
Posts: 1954
Joined: Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:16 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby snagglepuss » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:42 pm

Bajam wrote:Anyone ever write the all important writing section in cursive? 8)

I used wingdings.

W/r/t the statement, I printed both of my takes w/o issue. I never even learned cursive.

User avatar
Fianna13
Posts: 297
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:05 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby Fianna13 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:49 pm

Wrote mine in cursive for October. I looked at my writing response after the score has been released. I can barely read that stuff myself, so I doubt anyone can discern what I wrote....

062914123
Posts: 1846
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 2:11 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby 062914123 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:58 pm

.
Last edited by 062914123 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bombaysippin
Posts: 1977
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:11 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby bombaysippin » Thu Dec 05, 2013 10:00 pm

bee wrote:
dosto wrote:
Bajam wrote:Anyone ever write the all important writing section in cursive? 8)


I always write in cursive, so yes.

eta it was an illegible mess.

this

i write 100x faster in cursive than i do in printing so i write in cursive 99.9% of the time, but lol i cant even understand what i wrote when i look at my sample from oct


hahaha yup

User avatar
cheme2014
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:10 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby cheme2014 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 10:06 pm

I'm just hoping that: (1) the highway won't be frozen over, and (2) there won't be any accidents on the way to the testing site... :|

Edit: We won't find out the testing center status till tomorrow/Saturday. Yay, weather! :roll: :|
Last edited by cheme2014 on Fri Dec 06, 2013 12:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

dosto
Posts: 784
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:50 am

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby dosto » Thu Dec 05, 2013 11:45 pm

.
Last edited by dosto on Fri Sep 04, 2015 3:26 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
retaking23
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:34 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby retaking23 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 1:31 am

Doing some very light LSAT review just to keep juices flowing and I just need to rant about something:

I HATE the fact that LSAT doesn't keep all of its LR arguments airtight. Going over PT70, s1, q4. Supposed to be very straightforward this early on, right? The right answer is undoubtedly most supported but did Margaret explicitly include "educational needs" with general "needs of the community?" No. She did not. I remember, way back when I first started prepping, one of the cornerstones of LSAT logic was to not assume anything. Being good and kind was not the same as far as the LSAT is concerned. And here we have the LSAT making an EXCEPTION for its own convenience. There are tons of examples like this too. WTF. I hope there is nothing as annoying as these questions on 71, especially so early on in the section when I have on multiple occasions spent significant amounts of time fretting over this crap.

LSAT questioned me for 99% of this ride. I question it now. Prep has come full circle.

User avatar
mellow
Posts: 296
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 8:07 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby mellow » Fri Dec 06, 2013 1:38 am

retaking23 wrote:Doing some very light LSAT review just to keep juices flowing and I just need to rant about something:

I HATE the fact that LSAT doesn't keep all of its LR arguments airtight. Going over PT70, s1, q4. Supposed to be very straightforward this early on, right? The right answer is undoubtedly most supported but did Margaret explicitly include "educational needs" with general "needs of the community?" No. She did not. I remember, way back when I first started prepping, one of the cornerstones of LSAT logic was to not assume anything. Being good and kind was not the same as far as the LSAT is concerned. And here we have the LSAT making an EXCEPTION for its own convenience. There are tons of examples like this too. WTF. I hope there is nothing as annoying as these questions on 71, especially so early on in the section when I have on multiple occasions spent significant amounts of time fretting over this crap.

LSAT questioned me for 99% of this ride. I question it now. Prep has come full circle.

UGH THIS QUESTION. I spent all extra 5 minutes I had stuck on this question and didn't have time to review the other ones I circled. Got this one wrong anyway.

LSAC would usually mark this kind of answer as wrong for assuming needs of the community = educational needs.

User avatar
retaking23
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 10:34 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby retaking23 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 1:59 am

bee wrote:
retaking23 wrote:The one downside to this score is that -1 only because I've gotten that specific question wrong each time I took this exam and as recently as last week. Section 1, #23. I chose the same wrong choice each and every time too. See, I'm consistent with my mistakes. I've reviewed it thoroughly but I do not know why I still got it wrong. Brain fail. If anyone can provide a very simple explanation with emphasis on how you would eliminate the wrong answer choices, I would be very grateful.

argument: most ppl favor & doesnt violate, BUT wont be passed promptly (might not be passed at all)
conclusion: because of the argument above, this country is not a well functioning democracy (if its a demo. at all)

so in order to justify this conclusion, we want to add information that would complete the argument and make the conclusion sensible.

a) we dont know anything about who the bill would benefit, out of scope
b) the word "eventually" leaves open the possibility that the country in the stim could still be a well func. demo.
c) totally irrelevant
d) doesnt give us any information that would help justify our conclusion
e) ding ding ding.

IF the bill doesnt violate rights/most people favor it, THEN it will past PROMPTLY, otherwise the country is not a well func. demo. this totally justifies the conclusion drawn.


Man, I loved this explanation yesterday but now I'm scratching my head. AGAIN. Sigh.

Bee, or anyone else for that matter, is "eventually" really what makes B wrong? The argument does leave open the possibility of eventually with "if at all," no? Am I misinterpreting? I feel like B is wrong bcuz of "most other people" whereas stimulus only had "most people."

Here's how I'm thinking about it. Suppose we have a proposed law that doesn't violate anyone's rights for a certain country of 100 people. Of those 100, 49 are influential and 51 aren't. The stimulus says that so long as most ppl favor the bill (51+), it will be passed in a well functioning democracy. Now, look at choice B in this context. Most other is not the total 51 non-fluential, but a majority of that, 26 or more. This goes against the true majority the actual stimulus was looking for, no? In that sense, would B have been right had it kept the eventually but had simply "most people" instead of "most other?"

Someone please clarify. Is B wrong bcuz of a time issue or a numbers issue? Both issues are relevant but I feel that the numbers issue is more significant here.

EDIT: I read this over and "eventually" definitely creates a time issue that resolving the numbers issue simply will not overcome. I suppose the takeaway is that had eventually been replaced with "promptly" like choice E, the numbers issue would have kicked in. No? That makes B doubly wrong and me that much slower on the uptake for having gotten it wrong as many times as I have. Touche LSAT.

User avatar
bbkk
Posts: 728
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:28 pm

Re: December 2013 Retakers

Postby bbkk » Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:33 am

retaking23 wrote:
bee wrote:
retaking23 wrote:The one downside to this score is that -1 only because I've gotten that specific question wrong each time I took this exam and as recently as last week. Section 1, #23. I chose the same wrong choice each and every time too. See, I'm consistent with my mistakes. I've reviewed it thoroughly but I do not know why I still got it wrong. Brain fail. If anyone can provide a very simple explanation with emphasis on how you would eliminate the wrong answer choices, I would be very grateful.

argument: most ppl favor & doesnt violate, BUT wont be passed promptly (might not be passed at all)
conclusion: because of the argument above, this country is not a well functioning democracy (if its a demo. at all)

so in order to justify this conclusion, we want to add information that would complete the argument and make the conclusion sensible.

a) we dont know anything about who the bill would benefit, out of scope
b) the word "eventually" leaves open the possibility that the country in the stim could still be a well func. demo.
c) totally irrelevant
d) doesnt give us any information that would help justify our conclusion
e) ding ding ding.

IF the bill doesnt violate rights/most people favor it, THEN it will past PROMPTLY, otherwise the country is not a well func. demo. this totally justifies the conclusion drawn.


Man, I loved this explanation yesterday but now I'm scratching my head. AGAIN. Sigh.

Bee, or anyone else for that matter, is "eventually" really what makes B wrong? The argument does leave open the possibility of eventually with "if at all," no? Am I misinterpreting? I feel like B is wrong bcuz of "most other people" whereas stimulus only had "most people."

Here's how I'm thinking about it. Suppose we have a proposed law that doesn't violate anyone's rights for a certain country of 100 people. Of those 100, 49 are influential and 51 aren't. The stimulus says that so long as most ppl favor the bill (51+), it will be passed in a well functioning democracy. Now, look at choice B in this context. Most other is not the total 51 non-fluential, but a majority of that, 26 or more. This goes against the true majority the actual stimulus was looking for, no? In that sense, would B have been right had it kept the eventually but had simply "most people" instead of "most other?"

Someone please clarify. Is B wrong bcuz of a time issue or a numbers issue? Both issues are relevant but I feel that the numbers issue is more significant here.

EDIT: I read this over and "eventually" definitely creates a time issue that resolving the numbers issue simply will not overcome. I suppose the takeaway is that had eventually been replaced with "promptly" like choice E, the numbers issue would have kicked in. No? That makes B doubly wrong and me that much slower on the uptake for having gotten it wrong as many times as I have. Touche LSAT.


I think the main problem with B is "most other people." As you said, most OTHER people does not equal to "most people" in the original stimulus. "Eventually" makes it ambiguous, but "most other" definitely kills it, imo.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: comicbookdude and 20 guests