THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

What did you get?

180
8
6%
175-179
7
5%
170-174
32
23%
165-169
39
28%
160-164
27
19%
155-159
13
9%
150-154
8
6%
120-149
7
5%
 
Total votes: 141

User avatar
Pozzo
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Pozzo » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:11 am

I gotta be honest. I still do not understand the teenage driver question...

User avatar
em15
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:39 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby em15 » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:19 am

Pozzo wrote:I gotta be honest. I still do not understand the teenage driver question...


hahaha same

User avatar
Pozzo
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Pozzo » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:21 am

em15 wrote:
Pozzo wrote:I gotta be honest. I still do not understand the teenage driver question...


hahaha same

Maybe they should remove form scoring then? I dunno...

User avatar
sethnoorzad
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:28 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby sethnoorzad » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:22 am

163.

Just tried the fourth game. Whaaaa.... took me 30 minutes. I re-tried the 3rd game as well and that was a breeze compared to the 4th. Had a hard time finding a good way to diagram.

Anyway, congrats to everyone who took.

User avatar
34iplaw
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed May 04, 2016 2:55 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby 34iplaw » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:27 am

Pozzo wrote:I gotta be honest. I still do not understand the teenage driver question...


What were you between?

E is right b/c it basically strengthens the relationship by increasing the correlation and also eliminating outside factors.

User avatar
34iplaw
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed May 04, 2016 2:55 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby 34iplaw » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:27 am

sethnoorzad wrote:163.

Just tried the fourth game. Whaaaa.... took me 30 minutes. I re-tried the 3rd game as well and that was a breeze compared to the 4th. Had a hard time finding a good way to diagram.

Anyway, congrats to everyone who took.


Do you want to know the proper way to do it or a hint? It'll be a little irritating once you see it.

User avatar
Pozzo
Posts: 1697
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 3:36 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Pozzo » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:34 am

34iplaw wrote:
Pozzo wrote:I gotta be honest. I still do not understand the teenage driver question...


What were you between?

E is right b/c it basically strengthens the relationship by increasing the correlation and also eliminating outside factors.

I went B.

I see what you're saying, though. I think I was just trying to make the answer choices do too much work.

User avatar
em15
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2016 5:39 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby em15 » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:36 am

Pozzo wrote:
34iplaw wrote:
Pozzo wrote:I gotta be honest. I still do not understand the teenage driver question...


What were you between?

E is right b/c it basically strengthens the relationship by increasing the correlation and also eliminating outside factors.

I went B.

I see what you're saying, though. I think I was just trying to make the answer choices do too much work.


I wish we could see a breakdown of the % of people that got each Q right

User avatar
34iplaw
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed May 04, 2016 2:55 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby 34iplaw » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:37 am

Pozzo wrote:
34iplaw wrote:
Pozzo wrote:I gotta be honest. I still do not understand the teenage driver question...


What were you between?

E is right b/c it basically strengthens the relationship by increasing the correlation and also eliminating outside factors.

I went B.

I see what you're saying, though. I think I was just trying to make the answer choices do too much work.


I need to look again when I'm not so tired, but I really don't think I get some of the ones I got wrong... like I'll have to check. Yeah B seems like its a bit of a stretch...but I feel like it could go either way...maybe it weakens it since they are tardy because they wait until they are woken up.

User avatar
34iplaw
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed May 04, 2016 2:55 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby 34iplaw » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:38 am

em15 wrote:
Pozzo wrote:
34iplaw wrote:
Pozzo wrote:I gotta be honest. I still do not understand the teenage driver question...


What were you between?

E is right b/c it basically strengthens the relationship by increasing the correlation and also eliminating outside factors.

I went B.

I see what you're saying, though. I think I was just trying to make the answer choices do too much work.


I wish we could see a breakdown of the % of people that got each Q right


Agreed. I really need to look over these.

User avatar
Instrumental
Posts: 1392
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Instrumental » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:48 am

Part of me is curious about the answers I missed


A bigger part of me never wants to see an LSAT question again. :mrgreen:

User avatar
laqueredup
Posts: 278
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:05 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby laqueredup » Wed Jan 04, 2017 2:56 am

.
Last edited by laqueredup on Tue Feb 14, 2017 1:53 am, edited 2 times in total.

Hi-So - ArshavinFan
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:51 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Hi-So - ArshavinFan » Wed Jan 04, 2017 3:22 am

Got a 165.

Idc what people say to me, I'm fucking bummed.

I started from a 143 Diag, then took during a mock exam PT 56 - 170 ( during a timed proctored exam which was fresh)

Progress looks like this

June 2014 - Cancel
December 2015 - 162
October 2016 - 161
December 2016 - 165

I don;t care about the fact I'm an AA Male URM - I just want that fucking 170. What the hell more do i have to do???? I feel like i need a coach.

User avatar
34iplaw
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed May 04, 2016 2:55 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby 34iplaw » Wed Jan 04, 2017 3:55 am

Hi-So - ArshavinFan wrote:.


On LSAT tip:
I suspect you've been around TLS awhile if you have been a student of the LSAT for a while now, but you aren't terribly active. I'm not going to dig through the posting history, but people can probably provide some direction with breakdowns of each section and whatnot. I apologize if this is basic or just not that useful, but I don't have much to go on for LSAT advice here. I will say that I think one of the biggest things that holds people back in the mid to high 160s is not being able to embrace uncertainty. Accepting that you will not get every question right on the test is a tremendous boon on LR and RC. If you spend three or four minutes on a single weird LR question that just doesn't click and aren't giving enough time to every question, it doesn't matter that much if you got it right. The LSAT already won. You'd be better off eliminating a few answers, flag a best guess, and come back later the second you realize you are spinning your wheels. On my PTs, that is the tip that brought me into the 170s (granted, I scored 167 and 170 respectively despite much higher PTs), but others have made the same recommendations.

On how you feel about your score:
It's fine to be bummed about it. Just try to keep the perspective that a 165 is still better than ~90-92% of test takers (I don't know exactly, but I know a 167 is ~94%) that take the LSAT. It's an extremely respectable, good score that will likely net you quite favorable outcomes. I say this, as I legit had a brief moment of being totally stunned and disappointed with a 167. I'd say a breakdown or a mini crisis, but I think that may be a bit much of an embellishment. I did sit in a car for like twenty minutes without saying a word though. Long story short, it's fine to be disappointed, and it is great to want a better score. Just don't forget to keep perspective on it.

On December:
I still think the fourth game is a terribly designed game despite going -0 with certainty (well, certainty I got it all or none at all)... I'm not an LSAT writer, so they clearly know more than me. I literally have no idea how that game was doable without one weird/new/hard to see inference that made the game way too easy. Game three was appropriate. One inference made it a hell of a lot easier, but it was definitely doable/typical without it.

User avatar
Instrumental
Posts: 1392
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2016 11:08 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Instrumental » Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:02 am

Hi-So - ArshavinFan wrote:Idc what people say to me, I'm fucking bummed.

20+ point improvement is insane, but still I can understand your sentiment. You'd definitely want to get a consistent scores above 170 prior to test day to best ensure you get at least 170. Not sure how you studied or if you have fresh practice tests to take, but I would take a bit of a break before getting back into it. I don't remember the rules on limits to take the exam, but isn't it three every two years? You may have to hold off for a bit. This forum is great for tips. Let people know how you prepared and there will be a lot of great ideas for how to improve.

User avatar
sethnoorzad
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:28 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby sethnoorzad » Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:19 am

laqueredup wrote:
34iplaw wrote:
sethnoorzad wrote:163.

Just tried the fourth game. Whaaaa.... took me 30 minutes. I re-tried the 3rd game as well and that was a breeze compared to the 4th. Had a hard time finding a good way to diagram.

Anyway, congrats to everyone who took.


Do you want to know the proper way to do it or a hint? It'll be a little irritating once you see it.


I got very lucky and somehow stumbled into doing it that way from the start and din't understand why everyone thought it was so hard...
Thought Game 3 was much harder, then figured out the trick as I answered the last ? and felt really stupid.


Yes please enlighten me...

Hi-So - ArshavinFan
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:51 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Hi-So - ArshavinFan » Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:21 am

34iplaw wrote:
Hi-So - ArshavinFan wrote:.


On LSAT tip:
I suspect you've been around TLS awhile if you have been a student of the LSAT for a while now, but you aren't terribly active. I'm not going to dig through the posting history, but people can probably provide some direction with breakdowns of each section and whatnot. I apologize if this is basic or just not that useful, but I don't have much to go on for LSAT advice here. I will say that I think one of the biggest things that holds people back in the mid to high 160s is not being able to embrace uncertainty. Accepting that you will not get every question right on the test is a tremendous boon on LR and RC. If you spend three or four minutes on a single weird LR question that just doesn't click and aren't giving enough time to every question, it doesn't matter that much if you got it right. The LSAT already won. You'd be better off eliminating a few answers, flag a best guess, and come back later the second you realize you are spinning your wheels. On my PTs, that is the tip that brought me into the 170s (granted, I scored 167 and 170 respectively despite much higher PTs), but others have made the same recommendations.


My breakdown on this exam was
RC - 6
LR -4/-4
LG - 4

I have NEVER gotten -0 on LG. I don't how to explain it, its almost like my brain "gives out"!!! Like i wish i knew how to describe it to people on here There are people on here who i feel have no effing clue what its like to essentially have your brain battery literally "die" on you during an exam. Its like the task at hand is too much for my brain to compute in LG and I just fucking lose it. I know for a fact I have ADHD, but I refused to take medication for it as I see it as a fucking excuse and I hate excuses ( after all the Egyptians still built pyramids without modern technology), but I'm seriously starting to think it has an effect on me, because my short term memory compared to everybody else's on here seems fucking pitiful.

Also, you're right. I've been studying for the LSAT since Jan 2014 - that was my diagnostic. I bullshitted with 7sage, thinking that i was doing the right things, but the test day came and i realized i knew nothing. Had to cancel, i looked at a paradox question for 8 minutes lmao. I knew I was done. :D :D :D

December 2015 - i felt confident, but alas i got the 162. and this October, i kinda gave up because i knew i would be retaking it in December because my RC wasn't good enough.

As for the uncertainty. Please elaborate. I need all the help I can get honestly. I've been spending money on tutors that advertise online, but they havent helped me too much ( in particular for RC). If you need any other info, please ask. I don't have much money saved, as most everything i get i've been using on tutoring for LSAT, CC bills, and just life in general.

I'm really trying hard, but its not clicking. Im not out of hope, i just know its insanity to keep doing the same thing and expect the same result.




On how you feel about your score:
It's fine to be bummed about it. Just try to keep the perspective that a 165 is still better than ~90-92% of test takers (I don't know exactly, but I know a 167 is ~94%) that take the LSAT. It's an extremely respectable, good score that will likely net you quite favorable outcomes. I say this, as I legit had a brief moment of being totally stunned and disappointed with a 167. I'd say a breakdown or a mini crisis, but I think that may be a bit much of an embellishment. I did sit in a car for like twenty minutes without saying a word though. Long story short, it's fine to be disappointed, and it is great to want a better score. Just don't forget to keep perspective on it.

Hi-So - ArshavinFan
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:51 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Hi-So - ArshavinFan » Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:32 am

Instrumental wrote:
Hi-So - ArshavinFan wrote:Idc what people say to me, I'm fucking bummed.

20+ point improvement is insane, but still I can understand your sentiment. You'd definitely want to get a consistent scores above 170 prior to test day to best ensure you get at least 170. Not sure how you studied or if you have fresh practice tests to take, but I would take a bit of a break before getting back into it. I don't remember the rules on limits to take the exam, but isn't it three every two years? You may have to hold off for a bit. This forum is great for tips. Let people know how you prepared and there will be a lot of great ideas for how to improve.



Thanks for the compliment.

I know 20+ points is a lot lol. But I KNOW I can do better. I come from an athletic background so its natural for me to push and push, and keep pushing.

Now, to be World class in the LSAT is my goal but I know i need guidance in doing it though, but im so broke and i really dont know where to turn.

User avatar
34iplaw
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed May 04, 2016 2:55 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby 34iplaw » Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:40 am

Hi-So - ArshavinFan wrote:[color=#0000FF]My breakdown on this exam was
RC - 6
LR -4/-4
LG - 4

I have NEVER gotten -0 on LG. I don't how to explain it, its almost like my brain "gives out"!!! Like i wish i knew how to describe it to people on here


I mean this is an area to work on if possible. See if there is a particular game type or question type that throws you. In the past, I always screwed up min/max, as I rule drive games and, typically, write relatively little. For min/max, this is problematic as there could be some interplay that may be hard to discern from rule driving. To correct, I now always test my min/max answer and -/+1... trying -/+1 again if the direction holds.

Re: what you said after LG... this is not the best attitude to have. Taking medication for ADHD isn't an excuse, it's putting you on equal footing. There are possibly other reasons for taking ADHD medicine, but, if you don't want to because it you view it as a sign of weakness or making excuses, don't - that's silly.

Re: uncertainty... you mentioned starting at a paradox question for eight minutes. Never do that. You can get a certain number of questions wrong and score a 170. Today it was -11 with the caveat a 171 was a -9. -12/-13 is more common (I think... not sure). Even if you got that paradox question right, you lost, because the LSAT made you spend eight minutes on it. I understand it's probably an exaggeration. Basically, you are scoring high enough that certain questions should just click, and you should develop a feeling when you are spinning your wheels. When you score in the mid 160s w/ -5 in LG, you have a fairly good grasp of the concepts in LR. Good enough that some of the questions in the late 20s will also just click and they may not be as hard as #8 or #15 or whatever question you are spending too much time on. The idea of uncertainty is that you read through question #8...realize you just don't get it, so you reread it. You tick off answer choices that just couldn't possibly work, mark your best guess, and you move on. For me, this means I circle rather than fill in my answer with a mark on the number. If you have time, you go back at the end and check it. A "fresh" pair of eyes may make it click. If you don't, you fill it in before time runs out, so that you aren't making a totally blind guess. Another way to put it: in the mid 160s with -5 on LG and if you don't finish LR sections reliably or comfortably, spending 1:30 on a 30-60% chance of a question right is far better than spending 3:30-4:30 with a 100% chance of getting it right.

User avatar
Nightwing
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:44 am

.

Postby Nightwing » Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:48 am

.
Last edited by Nightwing on Fri Feb 17, 2017 3:14 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Hi-So - ArshavinFan
Posts: 153
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 4:51 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Hi-So - ArshavinFan » Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:51 am

How did you improve from the 162?
Last edited by Hi-So - ArshavinFan on Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sethnoorzad
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:28 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby sethnoorzad » Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:54 am

Here's my breakdown:

RC: -4
LR: -1
LR: -4
LG: -12

Those games effed me up but I just started studying again for Feb and I think the time away has given me a fresh perspective on it. I feel more comfortable like the way to do them isn't so foreign anymore. Feel motivated right now to do a lot of effective prep in the month coming up...

Even though I only got a 163, I'm feeling good.

User avatar
34iplaw
Posts: 3333
Joined: Wed May 04, 2016 2:55 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby 34iplaw » Wed Jan 04, 2017 5:02 am

sethnoorzad wrote:Here's my breakdown:


You are in a good place to be. RC and LR leave some room for improvement (you beat me on LR1 anyways and tied on LR2), but you have a lot of room to grow in LG. I do think games like the fourth are here to stay. It all depends circumstances, but don't necessarily rush into February... granted, -12 in LG leaves some room for some quick gains. One thing I will warn is about neglecting other sections. I totally neglected LR (LG to an extent, but that's a strength) to improve RC

Sec: Sept -> Dec
LG: -3 -> 0 {Sept was an aberration in regards to LG for me}
RC: -6 -> -2 {note: -6 was not atypical for me nor was -2 leading up to the second test... for me, the turning point was not caring about every detail}
LR: -4 -> -8 {can't entirely recall what I scored the first time whether it was -5 or -8...both scores were on the low side of a typical LR section for me}

TL;DR - don't rush Feb if it feels that way leading up. Focus on LG and get that down, but don't neglect other sections like I did.

User avatar
sethnoorzad
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2016 5:28 pm

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby sethnoorzad » Wed Jan 04, 2017 5:15 am

34iplaw wrote:
sethnoorzad wrote:Here's my breakdown:


You are in a good place to be. RC and LR leave some room for improvement (you beat me on LR1 anyways and tied on LR2), but you have a lot of room to grow in LG. I do think games like the fourth are here to stay. It all depends circumstances, but don't necessarily rush into February... granted, -12 in LG leaves some room for some quick gains. One thing I will warn is about neglecting other sections. I totally neglected LR (LG to an extent, but that's a strength) to improve RC

Sec: Sept -> Dec
LG: -3 -> 0 {Sept was an aberration in regards to LG for me}
RC: -6 -> -2 {note: -6 was not atypical for me nor was -2 leading up to the second test... for me, the turning point was not caring about every detail}
LR: -4 -> -8 {can't entirely recall what I scored the first time whether it was -5 or -8...both scores were on the low side of a typical LR section for me}

TL;DR - don't rush Feb if it feels that way leading up. Focus on LG and get that down, but don't neglect other sections like I did.


Nice. Yeah I think with LR I'm like 80% there. Just need to review some of my weaker question types.. And I get what you're saying about not caring about every detail. Over time you like develop this familiarity and confidence with the test. You already have a good ideas of its ins and outs so you flow smoothly through the sections. It's like..... I'm opening my LSAT creative side.... to reach LSAT enlightenment and bliss.

lol

I think that's a good tip you gave to balance work on all section types -- even your strong ones -- because it's not like you just learn the concepts and then you know it forever. For the LSAT it's important to warm up and practice often.

Seriously though it's a mental game test for sure. Yes it tests you on concepts, but the basic concepts are in the end pretty simple. You just have to play the game of juggling them in your head and staying afloat with the time.

RC -- I consistently score -5 and less. I've had perfect RC sections and many -2's in PT's. It feels variable, like I get one where maybe I am familiar with the topic (I studied John Rawls in an Ethics class and IDK if that really helped me with the questions but psychologically it was a boost), or maybe it just seems easy and I do really well. Then a hard one comes and I will perform worse. Haven't touched RC since Dec test though so I am probably speaking to soon.

LG -- My weakest point. Really feeling positive right now though about getting better over next month.

Congrats on the 170!

User avatar
Nightwing
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 4:44 am

Re: THE [OFFICIAL] The Official December 2016 Waiters' Thread - CONFIRMED GREY: 1/3/2017 @ 4:29EST

Postby Nightwing » Wed Jan 04, 2017 5:15 am

Hi-So - ArshavinFan wrote:How did you improve?


Ya know, I'm not entirely sure. :P

I did a lot more practice (even repurchased previously used PTs), started watching 7Sage LG videos whenever I had trouble and even when I didn't (those skills really saved my butt on PT 80's LG section, still ended up guessing a couple), ignored PowerScore's RC advice and stopped making marks on the passages, and thoroughly studied Powerscores's LR and LG bibles further. My RC in particular used to be the biggest wildcard, but things just snapped into place in time for the real deal this time. Can't fully explain it, not questioning it. :mrgreen:

I wish I had a good guide, but I personally liked the Powerscore LG and LR bibles, trying not to take any RC notes (gotta learn your own rhythm of important things to remember and passage relevance to overall flow), 7Sage LG videos and practice tips, and just practice, practice, practice broken up by review, review, review over and over again.

The two PTs I took right before the real deal were 176 (PT 50-something) and 171 (PT 79 from September).
Last edited by Nightwing on Wed Feb 15, 2017 1:35 am, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 11 guests