@sapalmeri I make sure I write down the "Lets's Review" section and force myself to draw the diagrams in my notebook for repitition sake.

@jzimo02 I believe that is why the word "indirectly" was added to the lesson.

@emilyclangie Uhmmm can we play this song with a beat?

@heyychrissaaay MEEEEEEEEEE

Time to spend 2 hours on this 20 minute video so exposure therapy will have me having this on lock till the concepts get more difficult 😍

First 5/5 w/o blind review in a while! The algorithm kept throwing things we hadn't covered in my study plan yet so it was rough for a while there.

12/12!

3/3 baby but wayyyyy over time

Wow this was a doozy

@TeklaCo this is so real lol, made this mistake on a lesson practice question and said never again lol So anytime i see the some arrow i now always automatically write it down flipped in my head. Just like how i thought myself to always right down contrapositives as well.

this was so satisfying to get right after all those mind boggling lessons

Hey! so #feedback, this graphic is a little misleading when it comes to the "some > few" section of the graphic. While I recognize that the graph was trying to show quanities / porportions from greatest to smallest. It accidentally implies that "some implies few", which is incorrect.

@niralidesai14270 This looks great but the only thing i would like to add is "MOST" is actually more than half, NOT at least half.

Like the video lesson's said, think of most as "Half + 1"

This would make the lower boundary of "Overwhelming Majority" at least more than 51%.

so

"overwhelming majority" means at minimum more than "most" (which is at least "half + 1")

"overwhelming majority" = higher than 52% (so around 55% and above) to 100%

YAS QUEENN

Oh I already know I am going to hate this

i got it right but the investment part of the prompt def had me overthinking lol, i had added it to my diagram and that is why getting the correct answer took a while.

@DominicStanley I believe the stimulus wants us to take "containing several different" authors as the editor having the CHOICE to include several different authors, not that it DOES contains several different authors.

I could also interpret the stimulus as saying while the editor is looking at the three named authors Lind, Knight & Jones, it does not mean they are not inlcuding other authors that are not those three.

I believe what the explanation means to imply was that , OUT OF THE THREE NAMED, there can only be 2 MAXIMUM from that list of three NAMED authors allowed in the textbook.

@StephenKim no the stimulus specifically says if Lind is included, Knight CANNOT be cause Knight tiggers Jones to be included as well and we CANNOT have all 3 in the textbook. This is why A is the correct answer.

3/3 :) Just took a while though!

5/6 not bad and only missed the one cause i read too fast and switched "and" for "or"

@matthewpfrye #feedback

Remembering to not go backwards on the arrow really helps!

I got it right but it took forever!

Staring at the last statement really helped.

I diagrammed it

/ SH > EP

contapositive being

EP > /SH (as seen in the explanation diagram)

"Maybe all high-waisted pants are also scrap, even if they’re not unsalable, because they’re horrible."

As a petite woman who loves high-waisted jeans, I take personal offense to this quote.

But in all seriousness, I too was stuck between B and E, but ended up ruling B out for the same reasons given in the explanations.

The additional comment simply elaborated on what was considered unsellable garments from retailers, it did not tell me what was causing the disrepency between unsellables and scraps.