One of my favorite parts of this course was the opening statement about the mechanisms that ensure the test will have good questions, and we should therefore be less concerned about arbitrary distinctions. You say that there is a large board, review processes internally, and there are incentives for test takers to appeal problems since it will improve their scores.

I take issue with the last premise though. I took the LSAT a few months ago and had two really large issues with the administration.

For one thing it started 2-3 hours late and was administered terribly with lots of loud sounds and talking. I wrote a complaint to the LSAC about this and nothing happened. This hurts my confidence in the fairness of the test.

Second, I had a strong suspicion about one of the questions being incorrectly written, but since the questions aren't posted anywhere and there seemingly isn't a way to appeal for adjustments, I have a strong suspicion JY was wrong in his initial course. I do not think there is any way to appeal questions, which is such a shame since this is such an important test and it is developed by a private company with zero oversight and a profit incentive to crank questions out as cheaply as possible.