Bubbling in answers after time is called..fair game? Forum

[bruss]

Almost everyone knows that its against the rules to bubble after time is called...the question is if its fair game.

And the fact that no one is willing to address the dialectical relationship of Morals and the increasing rationalization of america and its effect on cheating is the reason for these inane responses.

[DoubleChecks]

Almost everyone knows that its against the rules to bubble after time is called...the question is if its fair game.

And the fact that no one is willing to address the dialectical relationship of Morals and the increasing rationalization of america and its effect on cheating is the reason for these inane responses.

damn, wonder why the poster who quoted you took down his comment...lol

[174]

Almost everyone knows that its against the rules to bubble after time is called...the question is if its fair game.

And the fact that no one is willing to address the dialectical relationship of Morals and the increasing rationalization of america and its effect on cheating is the reason for these inane responses.

damn, wonder why the poster who quoted you took down his comment...lol

My troll-o-meter broke for a minute. Well played bruss.

[Kabuo]

Almost everyone knows that its against the rules to bubble after time is called...the question is if its fair game.

And the fact that no one is willing to address the dialectical relationship of Morals and the increasing rationalization of america and its effect on cheating is the reason for these inane responses.

I love the capitalization. And btw, cheaters are pathetic. Running out of time to even guess bubbles is no one's fault but your own. If you've prepared at even a basic level, you should never run into this situation. Stop making it sound like you're being forced into a position where you have to cheat or it's unfair. And yes, I know I scored high and it's like pineapple's millionaire thing, but I scored high after putting in a ton of work. This is cheating, and the best arguments for it ITT are that it is a choice they feel they have to make because of a situation that should never arise if they've prepared.

Pineapple written affectionately btw. I just remember your avatar better than your name.

[sportgirl234]

+1

[DoubleChecks]

Pineapple written affectionately btw. I just remember your avatar better than your name.

haha most seem to only remember my avatar lol -- which i have a greater attachment to than the screen name (in fact, i have NO idea how i even came up w/ doublechecks...it makes no sense to me). i would almost be up for mods changing my sn to something pineapple related...eh mods eh? <-- but then all my e-street cred that i have painstakingly built up would go down the drain lol

[Rotor]

Pineapple written affectionately btw. I just remember your avatar better than your name.

haha most seem to only remember my avatar lol -- which i have a greater attachment to than the screen name (in fact, i have NO idea how i even came up w/ doublechecks...it makes no sense to me). i would almost be up for mods changing my sn to something pineapple related...eh mods eh? <-- but then all my e-street cred that i have painstakingly built up would go down the drain lol

You know how many of them have a mod tag line attached to their user name? They could make the change to the name and add a tag line of "artist formerly known as doublechecks".

[DoubleChecks]

Pineapple written affectionately btw. I just remember your avatar better than your name.

haha most seem to only remember my avatar lol -- which i have a greater attachment to than the screen name (in fact, i have NO idea how i even came up w/ doublechecks...it makes no sense to me). i would almost be up for mods changing my sn to something pineapple related...eh mods eh? <-- but then all my e-street cred that i have painstakingly built up would go down the drain lol

You know how many of them have a mod tag line attached to their user name? They could make the change to the name and add a tag line of "artist formerly known as doublechecks".

hahaha that would be great, but i cant imagine why the mods would do that for me. guess it's time for me to accidentally bump into and meet vanwinkle on campus lol

[Kabuo]

hahaha that would be great, but i cant imagine why the mods would do that for me. guess it's time for me to accidentally bump into and meet vanwinkle on campus lol

Wait, VW goes to Harvard?

[bruss]

Almost everyone knows that its against the rules to bubble after time is called...the question is if its fair game.

And the fact that no one is willing to address the dialectical relationship of Morals and the increasing rationalization of america and its effect on cheating is the reason for these inane responses.

If you've prepared at even a basic level, you should never run into this situation. Stop making it sound like you're being forced into a position where you have to cheat or it's unfair.

How did I make it sound like its unfair if you don't cheat? And when did I even state a position where one would be forced to cheat? I didn't even imply something that absurd lol.

[Kabuo]

I am quoting you about the capitalization. The you after that is like vosotros or something. I mean YOU PEOPLE ITT.

[slacker]

It's cheating. I assume the majority do it or would given the option. It's completely unfair because not everyone does or would. You're altering an aspect of the test which is the time constraint. 35 minutes per section. You're taking a different test if you do this. I really don't care what rationalization you come up with.

And if any of you actually do this and then complain about it being unfair that other people are given more time because of learning disabilities, then there is something wrong with you.

[bruss]

I am quoting you about the capitalization. The you after that is like vosotros or something. I mean YOU PEOPLE ITT.

the word you are looking for is y'all

[bruss]

It's cheating. I assume the majority do it or would given the option. It's completely unfair because not everyone does or would. You're altering an aspect of the test which is the time constraint. 35 minutes per section. You're taking a different test if you do this. I really don't care what rationalization you come up with.

And if any of you actually do this and then complain about it being unfair that other people are given more time because of learning disabilities, then there is something wrong with you.

Whats unfair about it? Everyone has the chance to bubble after time.

[slacker]

It's cheating. I assume the majority do it or would given the option. It's completely unfair because not everyone does or would. You're altering an aspect of the test which is the time constraint. 35 minutes per section. You're taking a different test if you do this. I really don't care what rationalization you come up with.

And if any of you actually do this and then complain about it being unfair that other people are given more time because of learning disabilities, then there is something wrong with you.

Whats unfair about it? Everyone has the chance to bubble after time.

No they don't. It's already been mentioned that some proctors will mark down on a sheet the number remaining if you had a low number of test takers. Also people seated right next to a proctor, etc.

[seancris]

Almost everyone knows that its against the rules to bubble after time is called...the question is if its fair game.

IMO the fact that something is "against the rules" precludes it from being "fair game."

What's fair is that you have 35 minutes to fill in your answer sheet like everyone else, and if you're too dumb to be able to do that before time is called then your score will reflect that as it should.

[bomh6182]

nm

[CattyPake]

Someone in my testing room was still filling in answers after the proctor called for pencils down. For a moment it seemed like the proctor was going to write him up for it but she decided not to and just let him off with a warning.

He wasn't even trying to be subtle about it so I guess he just chose not to listen to the instructions at the beginning of the test...

[Nicholasnickynic]

If I say yes, will it help you sleep better at night?
People have no fucking morals.

[Nicholasnickynic]

I voted yes before reading the thread (and I took the LSAT?! haha), because I thought it meant when you have a couple blank and you hear the timer, you quickly bubble the two in. Which I've done. But I haven't gone back to any past sections before, because that is cheating in my book...

Wait, please explain why breaking the rules one way (Writing in a different section) is cheating

but breaking the rules in another way (writing after "pencils down") is not cheating?


You cheated, you are a bad person, your score should not count, you should not be in law school.

[Nicholasnickynic]

Almost everyone knows that its against the rules to bubble after time is called...the question is if its fair game.

IMO the fact that something is "against the rules" precludes it from being "fair game."

What's fair is that you have 35 minutes to fill in your answer sheet like everyone else, and if you're too dumb to be able to do that before time is called then your score will reflect that as it should.

[dba415]

I think most people realize that it is 'wrong' or illegal, the question is whether or not it is fair game, just because something is illegal does not mean that it is not fair game.

Whether or not other people do it will affect your own score (as you will be graded compared to them) so if 99 people bubble in answers after the end of a section and get 1 out of those 3 questions right while you are the 1 person who does not do it and gets all 3 wrong your score is worse and theirs better.

Thus, in essence, you choosing to take the moral high ground in this will actually be NOT FAIR GAME, you being disadvantaged and it being unfair to you. Basically it's up to the LSAT proctors to check this and make sure it is fair game for everyone, not yourself.

This is wrong on several levels.

For starters, the bolded part of your post is incorrect. Your ethical and moral point of view is horribly scary. You hit the 'shouldn't be allowed to be a lawyer' trifecta by claiming people that don't do it are disadvantaged, that the rule is unfair to them and that it is not the responsibility of students to play fair and obey the rules.

Good luck since you'll need luck with your point of view and set of values and possibly need a good defense attorney in the future.

I like how you drew conclusions about my set of values on an example that i used to illustrate that what is morally right is not always fair.

Answer me this, if on a test, everyone except you got the answers ahead of time and you didn't due to your choice of not wanting to cheat, and no one ever got caught, would it be fair to you?

If you answered no, then you agree with my earlier example.

Fair does not equate to being morally right. 2 different things. Never did I mention that cheating is right or morally okay.

[Nicholasnickynic]

I think most people realize that it is 'wrong' or illegal, the question is whether or not it is fair game, just because something is illegal does not mean that it is not fair game.

Whether or not other people do it will affect your own score (as you will be graded compared to them) so if 99 people bubble in answers after the end of a section and get 1 out of those 3 questions right while you are the 1 person who does not do it and gets all 3 wrong your score is worse and theirs better.

Thus, in essence, you choosing to take the moral high ground in this will actually be NOT FAIR GAME, you being disadvantaged and it being unfair to you. Basically it's up to the LSAT proctors to check this and make sure it is fair game for everyone, not yourself.

This is wrong on several levels.

For starters, the bolded part of your post is incorrect. Your ethical and moral point of view is horribly scary. You hit the 'shouldn't be allowed to be a lawyer' trifecta by claiming people that don't do it are disadvantaged, that the rule is unfair to them and that it is not the responsibility of students to play fair and obey the rules.

Good luck since you'll need luck with your point of view and set of values and possibly need a good defense attorney in the future.

I like how you drew conclusions about my set of values on an example that i used to illustrate that what is morally right is not always fair.

Answer me this, if on a test, everyone except you got the answers ahead of time and you didn't due to your choice of not wanting to cheat, and no one ever got caught, would it be fair to you?

If you answered no, then you agree with my earlier example.

Fair does not equate to being morally right. 2 different things. Never did I mention that cheating is right or morally okay.

In the example you just provided, what would be fair = what would be morally right:
-it would not be fair or morally right for the student to suffer;
-it would be fair and morally right for the student who did not cheat to have the better score.

If you are doing something that is morally wrong, what you are doing is unfair to all those who suffer as a result of doing the right thing. Fair does equate to being morally right. When you are morally wrong and benefit, that is not fair.

[TheFriendlyBarber]

Do whatever the hell you want.

[Nicholasnickynic]

Do whatever the hell you want.

Yes, just do it outside the legal profession. This thread is making me think that lawyers' reputation as slime balls that will do anything to get their way = true. All the people who answered YES- it is fair game, are the reason people hate lawyers; people don't like morally bankrupt assholes.

And to the dba14, people REALLY don't like morally bankrupt assholes who try to defend their positions with bad logic and false dichotomies.