I feel like if LSAC loses your score there should be a rule that automatically gives you a 180.

You say we learn from our "flaw lesson" but if we are following the course, the "flaw" lessons do not come until much later. So I don't see the purpose of referencing something we haven't learned, maybe explain what the "flaw lesson" is before throwing it out there because it's confusing otherwise.. It makes one think that they skipped a lesson, but in actuality we have not had this lesson.

And further you go on to say it failed the "2 step test" again, something we have no idea about because we haven't heard of the "2 test step."

I'm not sure if these lessons should come before the videos of the 2007 lsat, or you should consider describing how you to come to your conclusions in a way that makes sense for everyone, without using phrases we've yet to learn.