What the F**k is LSAC's Deal? Forum

HRomanus · Post by **HRomanus** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:40 pm

t-14orbust wrote:This would be a 180 thread, but it was harder than other threads so I'll give it a 165

Epic.

downbeat14 · Post by **downbeat14** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:49 pm

choward014 wrote:
downbeat14 wrote:
trexjake32 wrote:For those of you who support me and think this test was unfair, please feel free to sign my petition. I'm still working on editing it so it's cleaned up and more concise, but it will do for now. If I get 1000 signatures I will send it over to LSAC.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/dema ... ard-and-to
Trexjake, stop this now for your own good. I was enjoying watching you get ass raped by the veterans on here, but I have to beg you to stop what you are doing:

You are being an idiot. You just posted your score and name online. Are you serious? Take that shit down now or you are going to make this even worse. I'm honestly trying to help, not being an ass with that advice. These people have graduate degrees in psychometrics... you will not win an argument with them about equating a standardized exam. They have so much data on these questions... it's pointless to even consider petitioning them.

Also, dude you should be studying for a retake rather than wasting your time on here. There are a few games from the early to mid 90s (sometimes called formula games) that are very similar in set up and solving method to June. PM me if you want the list of games that are similar.

For reference, I got a 176 on June 2014 and went -0 on LG. If I had not have worked on those game types I would probably be bitching about it... but only to my girlfriend, not TLS. Do you realize adcomms look at these types of sites?

Edit: just saw you used a fake name... just FYI some schools have FBI members as adcomms... you're still being stupid
If you can, I'm actually a bit interested in these said games. I'll be taking it in september and i wont be surprised if they involve a tricky game in that one as well. I'm pretty good with games, but better to be prepared i guess

Choward, take a look at a few of these games to get an idea of what I'm talking about re: formula games or games that I thought were similar to June 2014 game 4 in set up or method:

PT 1, section 2, game 4
PT 11 section 1, game 4 (especially similar)
PT 13 section 1 game 4
PT 16 section 1 game 4

trexjake,

Notice they are all 4th games... yeah they are a little harder and sometimes take more work, but games 1-3 were very easy. You should've had 15+ minutes to work on June 2014 game 4 given the easiness of the others. If you weren't able to do that in that amount of time, then maybe you're just not good at "analytical reasoning." Get to work on studying instead of wasting your time here. If you are a troll, I'm super impressed you took it this far.

bombaysippin · Post by **bombaysippin** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:54 pm

omg, just when I thought this couldn't get better...

OP, just curious are you still in undergrad, graduate recently, or been out of school for a bit?

trexjake32 · Post by **trexjake32** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:02 pm

People: believe me, I am not a troll. I wish I was a troll and this was all a hoax. I am eternally frustrated that I have to take this test again and am doing everything in my power to make sure that I don't get raped again. On prep tests 65-71 I averaged a 172 with a lowest of 169. I took these tests with full conditions intact.

monsterman · Post by **monsterman** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:05 pm

How exactly do you want LSAC to notify test takers when it's not 'standard?' Nom nom, troll.

trexjake32 · Post by **trexjake32** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:06 pm

monsterman wrote:How exactly do you want LSAC to notify test takers when it's not 'standard?' Nom nom, troll.

As they did with the comparative passage. That was new and a deviation from the norm, and they administered an Official Prep Test beforehand so people would have some experience with it.

HRomanus · Post by **HRomanus** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:07 pm

trexjake32 wrote:People: believe me, I am not a troll. I wish I was a troll and this was all a hoax. I am eternally frustrated that I have to take this test again and am doing everything in my power to make sure that I don't get raped again. On prep tests 65-71 I averaged a 172 with a lowest of 169. I took these tests with full conditions intact.

Using "rape" in this context is severely disrepectful. Please don't do it again.

malleus discentium · Post by **malleus discentium** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:07 pm

trexjake32 wrote:
monsterman wrote:How exactly do you want LSAC to notify test takers when it's not 'standard?' Nom nom, troll.
As they did with the comparative passage. That was new and a deviation from the norm, and they administered an Official Prep Test beforehand so people would have some experience with it.

FYI, shitbirds, the next LSAT is going to be a doozy you should wait for February

love,
lsac

bombaysippin · Post by **bombaysippin** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:15 pm

Bajam wrote:OP, just curious are you still in undergrad, graduate recently, or been out of school for a bit?

rebexness · Post by **rebexness** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:15 pm

trexjake32 wrote:
monsterman wrote:How exactly do you want LSAC to notify test takers when it's not 'standard?' Nom nom, troll.
As they did with the comparative passage. That was new and a deviation from the norm, and they administered an Official Prep Test beforehand so people would have some experience with it.

What part of this test wasn't standard?

trexjake32 · Post by **trexjake32** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:19 pm

Bajam wrote:
Bajam wrote:OP, just curious are you still in undergrad, graduate recently, or been out of school for a bit?

Why..

bombaysippin · Post by **bombaysippin** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:20 pm

trexjake32 wrote:
Bajam wrote:
Bajam wrote:OP, just curious are you still in undergrad, graduate recently, or been out of school for a bit?
Why..

Just curious whether this whole thread is because you're young and naive or just not that smart (trying to be nice here).

trexjake32 · Post by **trexjake32** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:23 pm

Bajam wrote:
trexjake32 wrote:
Bajam wrote:
Bajam wrote:OP, just curious are you still in undergrad, graduate recently, or been out of school for a bit?
Why..
Just curious whether this whole thread is because you're young and naive or just not that smart (trying to be nice here).

I'm neither of those things and I just graduated

ManoftheHour · Post by **ManoftheHour** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:23 pm

vracovino wrote:
malleus discentium wrote:they destroyed the school?
He must think it means standardized

Louis1127 · Post by **Louis1127** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:24 pm

TrexJake,

I am going to repeat this from earlier in the thread because I think it may help you.

Instead of lamenting a hard, nonstandard logic game, your time would be better spent lamenting that law schools allow a four-hour test to factor about 80 percent of the admissions process rather than someone's resume, work experience, family situation, socioeconomic background, the list goes on.

The test-making division of LSAC's job is to create a test that ranks people on a bell-like curve. They do a damn good job of that.

Your beef is with law schools, not LSAC's test-writing division.

rpupkin · Post by **rpupkin** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:24 pm

HRomanus wrote:
trexjake32 wrote:People: believe me, I am not a troll. I wish I was a troll and this was all a hoax. I am eternally frustrated that I have to take this test again and am doing everything in my power to make sure that I don't get raped again. On prep tests 65-71 I averaged a 172 with a lowest of 169. I took these tests with full conditions intact.
Using "rape" in this context is severely disrepectful. Please don't do it again.

Agreed. I suggest using a more respectful term like "ass-reamed".

bombaysippin · Post by **bombaysippin** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:26 pm

trexjake32 wrote:I'm neither of those things and I just graduated

Ahh I see. Well, good luck! Follow your dreams!

bananasplit19 · Post by **bananasplit19** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:26 pm

Unfortunately, OP, it only goes downhill from here. If you're this reactionary over perceived LSAC arbitrariness, you're in for a rude awakening when you discover the 1L curve grading system:

The quicker you get over it, the better off you'll be when the shit really hits the fan.

malleus discentium · Post by **malleus discentium** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:27 pm

rpupkin wrote:
HRomanus wrote:
trexjake32 wrote:People: believe me, I am not a troll. I wish I was a troll and this was all a hoax. I am eternally frustrated that I have to take this test again and am doing everything in my power to make sure that I don't get raped again. On prep tests 65-71 I averaged a 172 with a lowest of 169. I took these tests with full conditions intact.
Using "rape" in this context is severely disrepectful. Please don't do it again.
Agreed. I suggest using a more respectful term like "ass-reamed".

still a joke at the expense of sexual assault try again

Jawbreakaz · Post by **Jawbreakaz** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:29 pm

trexjake32 wrote:
Bajam wrote: Just curious whether this whole thread is because you're young and naive or just not that smart (trying to be nice here).
I'm neither of those things and I just graduated

Oh jeez, I have a mutual friend with you on Facebook. Great.

Jawbreakaz · Post by **Jawbreakaz** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:29 pm

malleus discentium wrote:
rpupkin wrote:
HRomanus wrote:
trexjake32 wrote:People: believe me, I am not a troll. I wish I was a troll and this was all a hoax. I am eternally frustrated that I have to take this test again and am doing everything in my power to make sure that I don't get raped again. On prep tests 65-71 I averaged a 172 with a lowest of 169. I took these tests with full conditions intact.
Using "rape" in this context is severely disrepectful. Please don't do it again.
Agreed. I suggest using a more respectful term like "ass-reamed".
still a joke at the expense of sexual assault try again

I believe there was sarcasm attached to the 'ass-reamed' comment.

h3jk5h · Post by **h3jk5h** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:39 pm

This might be the most negative thread I've read on TLS.

I may understand OP's frustration, working so hard at something but not seeing the expected result can be especially frustrating. Venting out the frustration on an internet forum is understandable.

I would probably lock my door and cry myself to sleep at night.

03152016 · Post by **03152016** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:41 pm

h3jk5h wrote:This might be the most negative thread I've read on TLS.

you must be new here

FKASunny · Post by **FKASunny** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:42 pm

Less figth, moar KiKi!

A. Nony Mouse · Post by **A. Nony Mouse** » Wed Jul 02, 2014 7:57 pm

Dammit, I'm slipping, I actually responded to our recurrent troll. Nothing to see, folks.

What the F**k is LSAC's Deal? Forum

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Register for access!

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Register now!

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Register now, it's still FREE!

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Re: What the Fuck is LSAC's Deal?

Seriously? What are you waiting for?