I will score +170.

Although these sections definitely need videos to make grasping the concepts accessible, if you're struggling, I found that the "see full diagrams" makes it a little easier.

#1. If there is a conjuncture after a Necessary Condition Indicators, then the sufficent MUST lead to both. Not one or the other.

If you look up synonyms for "always," "every time" is the first to pop up. Why, then, was question two considered as a type 1 indicator?

What he did in the diagram was make the argument into a contrapositive by switching the order and adding a negation in front of both. (Easy to miss the / in the diagram)

It's true that SC→I ... In other words, if the individual is in the suspect class, it is sufficient to infer he is immutable. The SC is a "subset" of I, which is the "superset."

Turning it into a contrapositive would mean: /I → /SC ... this means if the individual is not immutable, then we must infer he is not a suspect class.

Hope this helps!

How does a concession differ from the context of other people's opinions? It seems like in both, you're presenting the opposition's argument first and then contradicting it with your own. Is concessions "in spite of this argument..." and other people's opinions "contrary to this argument..."?