Honestly same, minor in Econ. Crazy how much BS you can cut through when you know the topic.

In questions like weakening, flaw etc. is it recommended to stop reading other choices when you identify an answer that works? I understand with MSS not to because it's a scale but to save time for other questions. Anyone have suggestions on the strategy?

same urg

I literally yelled 'HOW'.... wow.

I hated this question but in retrospect the question is asking a questions about the movie viewer. A is tricky because it plays key words (when under time pressure could trip you up) 'success' of a movie which relates to viewers enjoyment, but that's the reason for producing not for WHY the VIEWER enjoys the movie. The Financiers want to make the movies that the VIEWER ENJOYS.

So when you look at it like 'Why doesn't the viewer watch the multiple versions of the same plot' :

A - Finance people say these types of movies are more likely to be successful than original plots.

B- With changing few details, they seem different enough. I

C- There's multi standard plots, and if you only see two movies a year you most likely won't double up on standard plots.

D - theres a pleasure from watching movies in a standard plot.

C - Yeah we use standard plots, but most of them are taken from 1940-1950. A

A is the one that really stands out and if anything is a result of the viewers actions.

I got this wrong because I was focused on identifying the main point, not what could be drawn from the conclusion. Good lesson.

Literally me out loud at 2:25

This one got me like a double negative, could be true except. So eliminating all answers where it is possible that chel violated the rules AND stel followed. regardless of how weak the possibility is.

What if the school is only asking for grades, LSAT and personal statement. Would I then mention my GPA was impacted by working full time to pay for school (in a better way, dedication and discipline).

I literally read this as 'the southern region of the earth' not a CERTAIN region. For anyone else that missed the key descriptor.

oh awesome thank you. So you lose time or do they account for that?

How did you deal with your internet going out, I would assume you wouldn't be able to continue?

I had easily eliminated A and E. I can see that 'objectivity' kept C for me, in rereading it I should have eliminated but D seemed like I'd be way too aggressive. Any advice for understanding when it's ok to be so aggressive or is it default always? Like will the answers always be very clearly a 'yes' if consider both passages?

My first instinct was Split Approach sounds insane, but maybe it will be easier?

Advice for how far outside of the 'highlighted' word in the stem we should be looking, IF we g back to the text?

This is helpful and had the same takeaway for next time lol

Agreed I took the narrow lens of the evidence of the rock, not of the theory the rock would prove.

We haven't gotten to all the passage style, but it seems to be whatever the author's opinion is?

We're not allowed to talk or make noise during the test but E actually made me laugh out loud.

same. The shock when I saw it was red lol

This one was tough. My advice to anyone is read each word slowly (like you're just learning to read) because lots of these hinged on one word POE

Any tips for how we can scribe some of this on paper, for online test takers?? Obliviously can't mark up the text well enough. Right now I'm just scribbling (1) intro (2)support. cred, resists pers, +old news).... but I don't know if this is enough.

anyone else have other things they're doing?

#feedback

This for me was 100% POE.

Tips on getting low res wording? I feel like I struggle to sum it in 2-3 words

Any recommendations for how to organize the low res, should we be doing it paragraph by paragraph or by speaker opinion (author/opposition). I have found the latter easier to understand the full argument but I could see in this question it would be good to know which paragraph it is in