Could be true questions on LG Forum

[Clearly]

I guess since I've been doin the games without charts, it seems a little confusing to interpret how to diagram and interpret the rules, but I will def. apply what you said to see how it works for me..this was really insightful.

The thing is, it's not any different than how anyone else does it. It looks like a different thing because the vertical
lines, but thats just there to separate the horizontal axis so you don't have to keep redrawing it. It's literally treated no differently than just doing

_ _ _ _ _ _
1 2 3 4 5 6

a bunch of times on top of each other.

[Clearly]

I guess since I've been doin the games without charts, it seems a little confusing to interpret how to diagram and interpret the rules, but I will def. apply what you said to see how it works for me..this was really insightful.

The thing is, it's not any different than how anyone else does it. It looks like a different thing because the vertical
lines, but thats just there to separate the horizontal axis so you don't have to keep redrawing it. It's literally treated no differently than just doing

_ _ _ _ _ _
1 2 3 4 5 6

a bunch of times on top of each other.

However, I do concede that for a first intro to the concept, I shouldn't have used the more complicated "slash" system of noting where you can swap things out. Just realize that where ever I used a slash, you could just write that out as two separate complete hypos, it'd be the same things, its just to save time and space, but for demonstration purposes, it would have been clearer to just rewrite the hypo on the next line with the change enabled by the slash. Also I just picked a game at random, ending up with a 9 person game with complex rule inferences wasn't a fortunate pick for displaying the idea simply.

Regardless, the point is basically that if you do the if questions and pay close attention, you've usually answered a few general (could be, must be) questions without even knowing it.

[ltowns1]

I guess since I've been doin the games without charts, it seems a little confusing to interpret how to diagram and interpret the rules, but I will def. apply what you said to see how it works for me..this was really insightful.

The thing is, it's not any different than how anyone else does it. It looks like a different thing because the vertical
lines, but thats just there to separate the horizontal axis so you don't have to keep redrawing it. It's literally treated no differently than just doing

_ _ _ _ _ _
1 2 3 4 5 6

a bunch of times on top of each other.

However, I do concede that for a first intro to the concept, I shouldn't have used the more complicated "slash" system of noting where you can swap things out. Just realize that where ever I used a slash, you could just write that out as two separate complete hypos, it'd be the same things, its just to save time and space, but for demonstration purposes, it would have been clearer to just rewrite the hypo on the next line with the change enabled by the slash. Also I just picked a game at random, ending up with a 9 person game with complex rule inferences wasn't a fortunate pick for displaying the idea simply.

Regardless, the point is basically that if you do the if questions and pay close attention, you've usually answered a few general (could be, must be) questions without even knowing it.

I totally get it now. I see what you mean after thinking about it. (I'm a slow learner lol)

[ltowns1]

I guess since I've been doin the games without charts, it seems a little confusing to interpret how to diagram and interpret the rules, but I will def. apply what you said to see how it works for me..this was really insightful.

The thing is, it's not any different than how anyone else does it. It looks like a different thing because the vertical
lines, but thats just there to separate the horizontal axis so you don't have to keep redrawing it. It's literally treated no differently than just doing

_ _ _ _ _ _
1 2 3 4 5 6

a bunch of times on top of each other.

However, I do concede that for a first intro to the concept, I shouldn't have used the more complicated "slash" system of noting where you can swap things out. Just realize that where ever I used a slash, you could just write that out as two separate complete hypos, it'd be the same things, its just to save time and space, but for demonstration purposes, it would have been clearer to just rewrite the hypo on the next line with the change enabled by the slash. Also I just picked a game at random, ending up with a 9 person game with complex rule inferences wasn't a fortunate pick for displaying the idea simply.

Regardless, the point is basically that if you do the if questions and pay close attention, you've usually answered a few general (could be, must be) questions without even knowing it.

One last question, I imagine that space is at a premium. You might have already answered this but how many diagrams did you end up having on average?? I would guess about 3 total( just a guess), and in/out sub group game seems to be very hard to pull off in terms of space, but I guess it's a matter of writing small enough. ( which I have to work on cause I always wright big)

[Clearly]

Nah, just do them one character tall! :
I N G U Y S | O U T G U Y S
I G U S Y N | U U T S O G Y etc.

It's just the nature of the game they you're gonna use less prior work with these games. It's gonna be more inference oriented for basic in out. Still keeping track of your work really comes in handy on harder games, I'm thinking Ruby Sapphire Topaz, that game was very prior work oriented.
Still do all ifs first, which will make up the bulk of these games, and the general questions are a joke. Once you have a few examples from the ifs it's really easy to spot who must always be out, or who could be in etc.

Yes, you'll generally end up with 3 or so examples, but could be more or less, and especially in the beginning you'll have a bunch of crossed off attempts when you tried something that broke a rule, that's totally fine, just cross it off and start it again on the next line.

Space won't be a problem. I was doing this pre 2012, where the game was all on one page, sometimes I'd have to work on the margins. Post 2012 you have all sorts of room to play with. Speaking of which, I recommend doing your chart on the right page. After you do the acceptability on the left page, you shouldn't need to go back to that page and it's silly to have to keep working off the page on the left once you're doing the real questions.

[ltowns1]

Nah, just do them one character tall! :
I N G U Y S | O U T G U Y S
I G U S Y N | U U T S O G Y etc.

It's just the nature of the game they you're gonna use less prior work with these games. It's gonna be more inference oriented for basic in out. Still keeping track of your work really comes in handy on harder games, I'm thinking Ruby Sapphire Topaz, that game was very prior work oriented.
Still do all ifs first, which will make up the bulk of these games, and the general questions are a joke. Once you have a few examples from the ifs it's really easy to spot who must always be out, or who could be in etc.

Yes, you'll generally end up with 3 or so examples, but could be more or less, and especially in the beginning you'll have a bunch of crossed off attempts when you tried something that broke a rule, that's totally fine, just cross it off and start it again on the next line.

Space won't be a problem. I was doing this pre 2012, where the game was all on one page, sometimes I'd have to work on the margins. Post 2012 you have all sorts of room to play with. Speaking of which, I recommend doing your chart on the right page. After you do the acceptability on the left page, you shouldn't need to go back to that page and it's silly to have to keep working off the page on the left once you're doing the real questions.

Cool, thanks again! Game are really the only section that needs drastic improvement for me. I think this will help a lot.

[Clearly]

Nah, just do them one character tall! :
I N G U Y S | O U T G U Y S
I G U S Y N | U U T S O G Y etc.

It's just the nature of the game they you're gonna use less prior work with these games. It's gonna be more inference oriented for basic in out. Still keeping track of your work really comes in handy on harder games, I'm thinking Ruby Sapphire Topaz, that game was very prior work oriented.
Still do all ifs first, which will make up the bulk of these games, and the general questions are a joke. Once you have a few examples from the ifs it's really easy to spot who must always be out, or who could be in etc.

Yes, you'll generally end up with 3 or so examples, but could be more or less, and especially in the beginning you'll have a bunch of crossed off attempts when you tried something that broke a rule, that's totally fine, just cross it off and start it again on the next line.

Space won't be a problem. I was doing this pre 2012, where the game was all on one page, sometimes I'd have to work on the margins. Post 2012 you have all sorts of room to play with. Speaking of which, I recommend doing your chart on the right page. After you do the acceptability on the left page, you shouldn't need to go back to that page and it's silly to have to keep working off the page on the left once you're doing the real questions.

Cool, thanks again! Game are really the only section that needs drastic improvement for me. I think this will help a lot.

If you keep practicing this method and working towards efficiency, anyone can perfect games. I started at 50% accuracy and never enough time. I went -0 on the real thing, and prob 28 of the prior pts. It's hard to explain how bad I was at games starting out.

[ltowns1]

Oh no dude I know.....I'm talking about that -14 out of 23 life lol. Most of it due to prob. Panicking on my part. I have severe anxiety

[ltowns1]

You have to watch for something for could be true questions as well. Just because it happens doesn't mean that it could be true. It could possibly mean that it must be true...which I guess puts a premium on representing when variables can trade with other variables.

[Christine (MLSAT)]

You have to watch for something for could be true questions as well. Just because it happens doesn't mean that it could be true. It could possibly mean that it must be true...which I guess puts a premium on representing when variables can trade with other variables.

Actually, if something MUST be true, then it would be a valid answer for a 'could be true' question. That's not usually what an answer choice is going to be, but it's possible.

(There is a rare question stem that asks which answer could be true but doesn't have to be true. That would obviously NOT allow for a 'must be true' answer.)

[ltowns1]

You have to watch for something for could be true questions as well. Just because it happens doesn't mean that it could be true. It could possibly mean that it must be true...which I guess puts a premium on representing when variables can trade with other variables.

Actually, if something MUST be true, then it would be a valid answer for a 'could be true' question. That's not usually what an answer choice is going to be, but it's possible.

(There is a rare question stem that asks which answer could be true but doesn't have to be true. That would obviously NOT allow for a 'must be true' answer.)

Oh ok...Christine I'm so serious, if I good a good score on this test...you're coming to my LSAT AFTER PARTY LOL HA HA LOL

[Clearly]

You have to watch for something for could be true questions as well. Just because it happens doesn't mean that it could be true. It could possibly mean that it must be true...which I guess puts a premium on representing when variables can trade with other variables.

Actually, if something MUST be true, then it would be a valid answer for a 'could be true' question. That's not usually what an answer choice is going to be, but it's possible.

(There is a rare question stem that asks which answer could be true but doesn't have to be true. That would obviously NOT allow for a 'must be true' answer.)

Hi Christine! I had a little heart attack when I saw your post and thought I said something wrong lol