The Official September 2014 Study Group

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:26 am

schmelling wrote:
ilikebaseball wrote:btw, real talk, can someone just walk me their thought process on necc/suff. Whenever a problem comes up, I immediately read the stem and write SA or NA next to it. But for the typical problem, what is your process step by step? Like, as far as how you eliminate, how you attack, when you negate, etc.



DO NOT negate on sufficient questions, it may work sometimes, but this only by chance that the sufficient assumption is also necessary. I negate on necessary assumption questions after I've knocked out 2 or 3 wrong answers.

yeah this got buried sry baseball i approach them roughly the same way look for the gap/term shift and then look for an answer that connects them the ACs are obvs diff and SAs can get a little more mechanical but yeah my approach is pretty similar

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:26 am

hereisonehand wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
hereisonehand wrote:colonel did you enjoy the mirrors passage?


if we are being honest, I like dense passages more than others bc I hate inference questions in rc. I thought the first question in it was annoying but the rest werent tooo terrible. It was the innate ability one that I made the dumber mistakes on. But overall I felt good about the section bc rc is usually my worst of the 4


I stared at that first question for a good while but ended up w/ some right answer circling, still missed two questions on it though (don't remember which ones), which is a lot for me OH SORRY QUIGZ I MEAN THAT'S ACTUALLY BETTER THAN NORMAL

yeah RC has become my worst section, instead of LG, because #drilling #mostlearnablesection


Speaking of question 1, it really seemed like the passage is saying that it's actual mechanisms are still up for debate am I inferring too much? It
Also seemed like the right answer is based on a very narrow part of the passage

Edit: SORRY FOR SPECIFIC Q DISCUSSION
Last edited by Colonel_funkadunk on Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:26 am

PeanutsNJam wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
PeanutsNJam wrote:who's quiggers


Someone who told me to grease it.

Explain this statement PNJ


It's possible he's referring to a specific stage in coitus commonly practiced by more progressive members of the Homo Sapien species. Generally, intercourse between two individuals involve insertion of the male's genitalia into the female's respective counterpart. However, some individuals prefer to instead involve the rectum due to its contracted and taut nature. This latter activity almost universally requires the use of a lubricant, which is perhaps what quiggers is referring to when he mentioned "grease".

THANKS PNJ FOR EXPLAININ

User avatar
schmelling
Posts: 1090
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 12:15 am

Post removed.

Postby schmelling » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:27 am

Post removed.
Last edited by schmelling on Sat Dec 05, 2015 1:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sfoglia
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby sfoglia » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:31 am

ilikebaseball wrote:btw, real talk, can someone just walk me their thought process on necc/suff. Whenever a problem comes up, I immediately read the stem and write SA or NA next to it. But for the typical problem, what is your process step by step? Like, as far as how you eliminate, how you attack, when you negate, etc.


You said you haven't used study books, right? The Trainer has this great section where Kim describes the kinds of wrong answers you'll see with NA questions, IIRC. There's always going to be one or two questions that are out of scope, usually one that misinterprets the stimulus' argument and one that does the complete opposite, etc.

Anyone remember this?

User avatar
accessislife
Posts: 283
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 10:40 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby accessislife » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:32 am

UGH work this week -_-

So with both assumption questions I find it helpful to figure out what the conclusion is - I know it sounds trivial but I had trouble with this for a while- and then after that for suff assumption I almost look at it as an MSS flipped and reversed - like most strongly supports the conclusion instead of supported by the stimulus

User avatar
Hand
Posts: 3524
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 11:33 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Hand » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:32 am

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
hereisonehand wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
hereisonehand wrote:colonel did you enjoy the mirrors passage?


if we are being honest, I like dense passages more than others bc I hate inference questions in rc. I thought the first question in it was annoying but the rest werent tooo terrible. It was the innate ability one that I made the dumber mistakes on. But overall I felt good about the section bc rc is usually my worst of the 4


I stared at that first question for a good while but ended up w/ some right answer circling, still missed two questions on it though (don't remember which ones), which is a lot for me OH SORRY QUIGZ I MEAN THAT'S ACTUALLY BETTER THAN NORMAL

yeah RC has become my worst section, instead of LG, because #drilling #mostlearnablesection


Speaking of question 1, it really seemed like the passage is saying that it's actual mechanisms are still up for debate am I inferring too much? It
Also seemed like the right answer is based on a very narrow part of the passage

Edit: SORRY FOR SPECIFIC Q DISCUSSION


I don't have it in front of me but I remember thinking that while it would be reasonable to conclude from the passage that what the proper theory is, is still up for debate, but it doesn't actually come out and say that, whereas it does explicitly state that the correct theory needs to incorporate both elements. But it's weird to present that as the main point of the passage - it is only thrown in there at the end. Shitty question. SORRY DECEMBER THREAD WE ARE DISCUSSING A QUESTION

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:39 am

Thanks hand that actually makes a lot of sense

User avatar
Hand
Posts: 3524
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 11:33 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Hand » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:39 am

ITT we sometimes stay on topic

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:41 am

hereisonehand wrote:ITT we sometimes stay on topic


And that's sometimes depressing

User avatar
hetookmetoamovie
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:03 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby hetookmetoamovie » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:43 am

It's fall, guys. (Not that we have seasons in California.)

ETA: Not on topic for long!

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:46 am

hetookmetoamovie wrote:It's fall, guys. (Not that we have seasons in California.)

ETA: Not on topic for long!



This means I have about two weeks of nice weather pre blizzard

User avatar
hetookmetoamovie
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:03 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby hetookmetoamovie » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:48 am

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
hetookmetoamovie wrote:It's fall, guys. (Not that we have seasons in California.)

ETA: Not on topic for long!



This means I have about two weeks of nice weather pre blizzard


I'll be sunbathing while the earth opens up and swallows the state whole.

User avatar
Hand
Posts: 3524
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 11:33 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Hand » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:49 am

hetookmetoamovie wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
hetookmetoamovie wrote:It's fall, guys. (Not that we have seasons in California.)

ETA: Not on topic for long!



This means I have about two weeks of nice weather pre blizzard


I'll be sunbathing while the earth opens up and swallows the state whole.


Yeah this. Well it'll probably rain a couple times at some point. But probably not 'till winter. ETA: if we make it that long!

ilikebaseball
Posts: 4103
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:04 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby ilikebaseball » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:52 am

definitely gonna refer back to this page later on this afternoon. GOTTA GET A LIFT IN NOW HURRRDURRRRR

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:53 am

hereisonehand wrote:
hetookmetoamovie wrote:
Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
hetookmetoamovie wrote:It's fall, guys. (Not that we have seasons in California.)

ETA: Not on topic for long!



This means I have about two weeks of nice weather pre blizzard


I'll be sunbathing while the earth opens up and swallows the state whole.


Yeah this. Well it'll probably rain a couple times at some point. But probably not 'till winter. ETA: if we make it that long!


Me before I get my lsat score

Image

User avatar
Hand
Posts: 3524
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 11:33 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Hand » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:56 am

Colonel_funkadunk wrote:
Me before I get my lsat score

Image


Colonel your gifs are totally on point as of late

Here's me anticipating my score

Image

ETA

JK it'll be more like this

Image

User avatar
hetookmetoamovie
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:03 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby hetookmetoamovie » Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:59 am

<3 Colonel <3 hand

me

Image

User avatar
hetookmetoamovie
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:03 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby hetookmetoamovie » Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:01 pm

the irony in your gif, Hand, is that you're still friggin' McDreamy.

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:04 pm

bill

Image

User avatar
hetookmetoamovie
Posts: 620
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2014 12:03 am

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby hetookmetoamovie » Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:08 pm

Ok, off to finally take PT71

looking forward to the RC and seeing how the Timberlake hypothesis holds up

Image

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:13 pm

ITT: gif game proper

User avatar
BillPackets
Posts: 2159
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:56 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby BillPackets » Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:15 pm

hetookmetoamovie wrote:Image


hereisonehand wrote:Image


these two were just really on point

User avatar
PeanutsNJam
Posts: 3699
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:57 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby PeanutsNJam » Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:26 pm

every time I see you guys use ETA I think estimated time to arrival

User avatar
Colonel_funkadunk
Posts: 2794
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 11:03 pm

Re: The Official September 2014 Study Group

Postby Colonel_funkadunk » Tue Sep 23, 2014 12:29 pm

PeanutsNJam wrote:every time I see you guys use ETA I think estimated time to arrival


Same until I googled it




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexandros and 11 guests