The Official September 2014 Study Group Forum

[Colonel_funkadunk]

im so lost who tf is j crew

HRomanus, I assume? Also, being bored as work as well, I tried retracing what I assume were Toby's steps, but have not been successful.

Yea his tar was j crew. Did you go to the post where he put the exact pic he put on twitter along w the exact hash tags, I think it's pahe 108-109

[A. Nony Mouse]

Bored at work. Found J. Crew on twitter.

lets not forget how much work toby put into finding J-CREW on other forms of social media. a collective thanks, mr ziegler.

also clearly no one should ever mention that they have any form of social media cuz like...we'll find u

Sure, but anyone who outs someone's real world social media on this site will be perma banned right quick. Knock it the fuck off.

[BillPackets]

Sure, but anyone who outs someone's real world social media on this site will be perma banned right quick. Knock it the fuck off.

sorry nony

[Toby Ziegler]

Well, off work and on to study. I think this was talked about a few pages back, but do the level 4 parallel flaw questions take you guys FOREVER, as well?

[BillPackets]

Well, off work and on to study. I think this was talked about a few pages back, but do the level 4 parallel flaw questions take you guys FOREVER, as well?

I finally just started biting the bullet and diagramming the parallel reasoning/flaw questions if they're heavy on conditional logic. It takes a bit longer, but it's pretty hard to miss when you diagram them. The worst is when they throw a tough parallel flaw at like number 24/25.

[Mal Reynolds]

Toby pls

[Superstaranonymous]

.

[Gray]

.

[nmjensen]

So I'm working on finding the flaw and am wondering if knowing the difference between the author taking something for granted versus failing to consider something is vitally important. I get why it's flawed and can come up with examples to show how it's flawed but I somehow swap taking for granted and failing to consider.

Ex: A dog is a moderate barker b/c she's half lab (barks a lot) and half St. Bernard (barks a little). Flaw: takes for granted a cross breed gets equal characteristics. I said fails to consider one trait may be dominant.

Is this even an issue? Am I wasting my time if I go back and drill this?

Also lol jcrew

[valen]

Just sayin that you guys who are feeling pretty smug about the HRomanus thing, as adults, basically just effectively bullied an individual off this forum when the whole purpose of this website is to be informative and supportive, so... :applause:

[schmelling]

played whack-a-mole this week. Ignored LR to review games and ended up just going -4 on a timed section. was in the -2 range last week. I took it on its own to shake of the cobwebs before I PT tomorrow, so hopefully it worked. October 2011 in the morning. here's hoping I can see some improvement.

[Colonel_funkadunk]

So I'm working on finding the flaw and am wondering if knowing the difference between the author taking something for granted versus failing to consider something is vitally important. I get why it's flawed and can come up with examples to show how it's flawed but I somehow swap taking for granted and failing to consider.

Ex: A dog is a moderate barker b/c she's half lab (barks a lot) and half St. Bernard (barks a little). Flaw: takes for granted a cross breed gets equal characteristics. I said fails to consider one trait may be dominant.

Is this even an issue? Am I wasting my time if I go back and drill this?

Also lol jcrew

If it says fail to consider the following words will be a possibility or assumption the author didn't take into account.

If it says takes for granted the following will be an assumption that's overvalued.

That's a vague explanation

[Superstaranonymous]

.

[schmelling]

So I'm working on finding the flaw and am wondering if knowing the difference between the author taking something for granted versus failing to consider something is vitally important. I get why it's flawed and can come up with examples to show how it's flawed but I somehow swap taking for granted and failing to consider.

Ex: A dog is a moderate barker b/c she's half lab (barks a lot) and half St. Bernard (barks a little). Flaw: takes for granted a cross breed gets equal characteristics. I said fails to consider one trait may be dominant.

Is this even an issue? Am I wasting my time if I go back and drill this?

Also lol jcrew

If it says fail to consider the following words will be a possibility or assumption the author didn't take into account.

If it says takes for granted the following will be an assumption that's overvalued.

That's a vague explanation

Solid explanation. Though to be honest, I don't think you're having an issue. Its a good tool to predict an answer before moving into the choices, but you arent going to predict 100% right away. As long as you are along the lines of where you see the argument go wrong you should be okay, though drilling will never do you harm, and finding flaws will help you with almost all LR problems since most of the questions are about analyzing, responding to, or amending a poor argument.

[Superstaranonymous]

.

[rwe13]

Love the homage to Bird... I definitely agree with your strategy. As soon as I stopped marking up RC and just read it, quickly, straight through, I went from -5, -7 to -2, -1.

Thanks, Bird was the man.

So are you suggesting that I should I aim to cease all marking? I'm just really hesitant to do so since pointing out the conclusions has helped me frequently avoid tricky wrong answer choices and kind of serves as a subject marker for a quick read

Not necessarily, I just agree with the general strategy. The only other key adjustment for me was identifying with the authors perspective as I read. Hopefully, I find another adjustment to get some -0s in there haha

[chup]

You guys seem distinctly less terrible than generations of LSAT studiers/waiters before you.

[sfoglia]

Ughhh, I just went -4 on LG for PT 54 because of stupid, sloppy mistakes. I finished five minutes early! I'm a bit disappointed in myself, but also grateful that my score hasn't depreciated.

I can't seem to get RC or LR any lower than -2. I've never, not even when I'm untimed, gotten less than -2. I think I'm averaging-2 on RC and between -2 and -3 for LR.

Lady Grey (smccgrey), since we both have very similar educational backgrounds and the same occupation, did you find anything particularly useful in your studies that you think might be applicable to me? I feel like (hope!) we might use similar logic, as writers, and I would so much appreciate any advice you can offer.

[BillPackets]

Just registered. Inb4 the deadline.

[BillPackets]

You guys seem distinctly less terrible than generations of LSAT studiers/waiters before you.

Oh that's good I was feelin bad for the shenanigans today.

Nbd bout today guys!

[sfoglia]

Just sayin that you guys who are feeling pretty smug about the HRomanus thing, as adults, basically just effectively bullied an individual off this forum when the whole purpose of this website is to be informative and supportive, so... :applause:

I hope not. Everyone has an error in judgement at some time or another. He shouldn't feel uncomfortable returning to this thread, unless it's an issue of ego.

I also think that quite a few of us in here can be very facetious and cheeky; I truly hope that he doesn't take anything that I said personally, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who wasn't intending any insult.

[Colonel_funkadunk]

You guys seem distinctly less terrible than generations of LSAT studiers/waiters before you.

Oh that's good I was feelin bad for the shenanigans today.

Nbd bout today guys!

[ilikebaseball]

You guys seem distinctly less terrible than generations of LSAT studiers/waiters before you.

thx

[hillz]

Gonna PT tomorrow at the campus where I'm taking the real thing...anybody else doing this?

[sashafierce]

Where is LLH? She has such a calming presence, I can feel her positive vibes all the way in the Caribbean She needs to be more active ITT