The Official June 2015 Study Group Forum

[Dr. Nefario]

#ultimatebetrayal

Bunny! Bunny?! BURN IT DOWN!! BURN THE THREAD!!!!

[Smallville]

The tar didn't tip you off before?

Who is your tar?

[RZ5646]

The tar didn't tip you off before?

Who is your tar?

I'm too lazy to reverse image search it

[RZ5646]

#ultimatebetrayal

Bunny! Bunny?! BURN IT DOWN!! BURN THE THREAD!!!!

Santoki? Is that you?

[Smallville]

#ultimatebetrayal

Bunny! Bunny?! BURN IT DOWN!! BURN THE THREAD!!!!

Santoki? Is that you?

[RZ5646]

I can't communicate through animated gifs. Am I doomed to fail in the modern world?

[Dr. Nefario]

I can't communicate through animated gifs. Am I doomed to fail in the modern world?

Nah, several congressmen haven't sent an email in the 30 years it's been around so you'll be okay.

[Smallville]

I can't communicate through animated gifs. Am I doomed to fail in the modern world?

[The Abyss]

[betterLawyerUP]

Test 29, S4, Q12, How in the hell is A right, makes no sense, im ready to fight someone over this.

In essence, drivers with points and convicted offense should be sentenced to jail or reeducation. Reeducation should only be offered if the driver is likely to be made more responsible. It is always almost impossible to make these drivers more responsible.

Answer A should be wrong because it is only could be true. Always almost does not deprive the option of reeducation, so you cannot label all the drivers as done in answer A for a MBT.

This is an inference question. Meaning it won't be perfect, but will be the most supported. (Is not a Must Be True necessarily)

[Drivers with high demerits and conviction should be jailed or re-educated] - Statement
Drivers should be re-educated ---> Likely made more responsible
CAVEAT:
Almost always impossible to make them more responsible, therefore almost always not going to suggest re-education.

Wrong answers:
B - Out of scope. Whether or not it offers the best chance is irrelevant to whether they should or should not be jailed or re-educated.
C - Out of scope. Degree of harshness is never mentioned in the stim, just that it's unlikely re-education makes them more responsible.
D - Out of scope. Not concerned with people who have no demerits.
E - Out of scope. Not concerned with people who have not been convicted

Correct answer:
A - Yeah this does it. You can infer that this is supported bc if it is almost always impossible to be made more responsible for these people, then the other option is jail. So they should be sent to jail.

ETA: A is the answer not because it is great, but because the other ones are worse.

Thanks for the response. I did agree that A is the most supported, but I thought the LSAC forces a question to be true. Meaning, when they say most strongly supported, isn't the correct answer suppose to be a must be true while the other answers could be true, which ensures only one answer. In other words, since answer A is not must be true and only most supported, it is left up to debate, which I thought the LSAT doesnt permit.

Idk it doesn't make sense to me if someone can clarify. This specific problem presents issues. What if the driver being mentioned can be made responsible, thus they should not be sent to jail, thus A doesnt really apply

[Dr. Nefario]

ILYSM RN

[betterLawyerUP]

Oh and I havent been studying for the past week, hard to balance work and friends and family inviting you to things, takes away the whole days worth of study time (anyone experience this?). Feels like I have to be an asshole to everyone to get the alone time necessary. Seems I missed the ganging up on RZ, are we gonna do an intervention? I think we should continue to berate him until he PW

[RZ5646]

You guys don't deserve a PW from me.

ETA: Yes I also struggle severely with finding time to study. There's always some excuse. But I'm reaching the point where either I start studying 4+ hours per day errday or postpone to October and lose most of my $170 registration fee. I'm going to try to study hard in the next couple months, but I'm not taking June unless I feel like I'm at my full potential. I've half-assed way too many things in my life and want to get this right: one take, 175+.

[Smallville]

Thanks for the response. I did agree that A is the most supported, but I thought the LSAC forces a question to be true. Meaning, when they say most strongly supported, isn't the correct answer suppose to be a must be true while the other answers could be true, which ensures only one answer. In other words, since answer A is not must be true and only most supported, it is left up to debate, which I thought the LSAT doesnt permit.

Idk it doesn't make sense to me if someone can clarify. This specific problem presents issues. What if the driver being mentioned can be made responsible, thus they should not be sent to jail, thus A doesnt really apply

only for a question asking you what can be inferred or what MUST be true...
If it asks for what is most strongly supported by the above then chances of the answer being a MBT answer are very slim. But the other answers will be clearly wrong. And by clearly wrong means they are irrelevant or something the stimulus does not support or hint at. They may be true facts or reasonable in real world terms but the question wants to know what is supported by the stimulus given

[Smallville]

You guys don't deserve a PW from me.

[Dr. Nefario]

Just a heads up RZ, one take 175+ is a great goal, but you can work your butt off and it not happen. Some study countless hours and the test or parts of the test still beat them. And others still PT 178 non-stop then hit 174. I'm not trying to discourage, just saying if you don't get it on the first try, don't give up.


ETA: I beliebe in you, just don't want you to ever give up.

[RZ5646]

Just a heads up RZ, one take 175+ is a great goal, but you can work your butt off and it not happen. Some study countless hours and the test or parts of the test still beat them. And others still PT 178 non-stop then hit 174. I'm not trying to discourage, just saying if you don't get it on the first try, don't give up.
Signed,
A guy who took three times never to reach my PT scores.

I agree. Basically I just don't want to get a mediocre score and know that it was due to laziness. If I experience a test day drop, that would be okay. Taking the test when I'm still PTing below 175 would not be okay. (Idk if you've been following my PTs, but LG is the only thing between me and the 177+ range).

[Shakawkaw]

Just a heads up RZ, one take 175+ is a great goal, but you can work your butt off and it not happen. Some study countless hours and the test or parts of the test still beat them. And others still PT 178 non-stop then hit 174. I'm not trying to discourage, just saying if you don't get it on the first try, don't give up.
Signed,
A guy who took three times never to reach my PT scores.

I agree. Basically I just don't want to get a mediocre score and know that it was due to laziness. If I experience a test day drop, that would be okay. Taking the test when I'm still PTing below 175 would not be okay. (Idk if you've been following my PTs, but LG is the only thing between me and the 177+ range).

You need a wake up call. I hope June does you well in those regards.

[RZ5646]

Just a heads up RZ, one take 175+ is a great goal, but you can work your butt off and it not happen. Some study countless hours and the test or parts of the test still beat them. And others still PT 178 non-stop then hit 174. I'm not trying to discourage, just saying if you don't get it on the first try, don't give up.
Signed,
A guy who took three times never to reach my PT scores.

I agree. Basically I just don't want to get a mediocre score and know that it was due to laziness. If I experience a test day drop, that would be okay. Taking the test when I'm still PTing below 175 would not be okay. (Idk if you've been following my PTs, but LG is the only thing between me and the 177+ range).

You need a wake up call. I hope June does you well in those regards.

I don't understand what you mean by this

[Procyon]

I have the same goal. If I feel below 173, I am inclined to cancel the score and go again in October and so forth until I use up my three tries this year. However, I probably don't have enough gas in the tank to go the distance so I will dedicate everything I have to ensuring that June is the last time. I will probably forgo law school entirely if things don't work out this time; five years later, I don't have the option of another delay.

On a higher note, I just did PT60 and got a 177. This is heartening because PT60 is the actual exam (170) that I am hoping to exceed.

[Dr. Nefario]

I have the same goal. If I feel below 173, I am inclined to cancel the score and go again in October and so forth until I use up my three tries this year. However, I probably don't have enough gas in the tank to go the distance so I will dedicate everything I have to ensuring that June is the last time. I will probably forgo law school entirely if things don't work out this time; five years later, I don't have the option of another delay.

On a higher note, I just did PT60 and got a 177. This is heartening because PT60 is the actual exam (170) that I am hoping to exceed.

Just curious- what brings you back after five years? Also, congrats on your PT!

[Procyon]

Just curious- what brings you back after five years? Also, congrats on your PT!

Thanks!

I realise it's actually been a four year hiatus since I took the LSAT junior year. I didn't get into any of the schools I was targeting based on my GPA/LSAT and the recession, along with a better understanding of finance and debt, convinced me that I should get a job. I know I want to be a lawyer and now that the economy is healthier, I am back with better credentials hopefully and more money in the bank.

[Rigo]

Remember when RZnumbers said be wouldn't post until he scored a 175+ on a PT.

A man of his word he is not.

[Rigo]

You guys don't deserve a PW from me.

(Is uggo)

[RZ5646]

I know you fuckers don't care, but LG is kicking my ass right now. Postponing until October is looking more and more likely. I don't want to sprint through my study materials only to still be mediocre at LG in June.