Hey guys! First of all a huge thank you to the 7sage community -- you guys have definitely been instrumental throughout this whole LSAT monkey business. I started studying last year and sat for my first take in Dec. Maybe I was nervous, maybe game 3 was a doozy but I scored 165, which was 2 points below my diagnostic (Preptest A). I had been averaging 173/174 before Dec so I decided to retake. By February I was averaging 175/176 and ended up with a 173.

My concern is that I'm a splitter. My GPA (3.45) is well below the 25ths of most schools I'm looking at, so I know I have to pull off an LSAT in the 75th. Do I retake and try to pull a 175+? How bad does a third take look?

I'm not applying until fall of next year so I have plenty of time, but a retake would be significatly harder to arrange because I will be abroad and would have to travel to another country for a testing center.

Anyway, would a few more points be worth it?

*I am also URM, which might affect admission chances

So I got frustrated about three weeks ago because I had plateaued, and in the past two weeks I did a total of maybe one LR section and one RC passage (so nothing). Seeing as the exam is on Saturday, the panic renewed itself and I took PT 62 today. I got my highest PT score ever -- a 178. I was averaging ~174 for the 6 PTs before that.

I know other people have asked about this, but I feel that burnout is not really gonna happen to me in the next three days because I already took two weeks off. That being said, are these real gains? Am I gonna get anything from 3 extra PTs this week? Or should I just cross my fingers and take it easy until Saturday? (By taking it easy I would do maybe one PT and a couple of sections)

Also this: https://www.reddit.com/r/LSAT/comments/3un7d3/i_ate_at_chipotle_today_im_taking_the_december_5th/

Hey guys! So two of us were discussing this question on the BR call last night. I chose D, which is the correct answer, but I want confirmation for why E is wrong.

The question asks for a characteristic of "games that are intentionally commodified." The pertinent lines in the passage read: "By contrast, tax doctrine and policy counsel taxation of the sale of virtual items for real currency, and, in games that are intentionally commodified, even of in-world sales for virtual currency, regardless of whether the participant cashes out."

So we know we are looking for instances of in-world sales, or virtual to virtual, with perhaps the possibility of conversion into real money. With this we can eliminate A, which concerns real to virtual; B, which describes pure barter with no virtual currency component; and C, which does not directly address in-world trade.

I chose D because the first sentence of Passage B explains that a way in which some games encourage real-world trade in virtual items is by granting participants intellectual property rights in their creations. This aligns with the "intentional commodification" aspect.

But why is E wrong? It's talking about virtual to virtual, and I don't think it would be a stretch to assume that you could convert one of these currencies into real money. Currency conversion is, in a strict sense, a "sale," so converting one virtual currency into another would be an in-world sale. Is it because the passages never talk about different types or trade between virtual currency and as such this is new information? Or because the word "exchange" in answer choice E alludes to a barter rather than a sale?

I would appreciate anyone's help on this!