them no longer highlighting the text they are referring to in their questions truly truly screwed me over "in middle of the last paragraph" my azz

@Bobby68 oh damn ok! They said they’ll submit a report but I’ll do one too and ask for…idk just something 😅

also realized I should do the writing section asap before they close my account after receiving a report…

@RinHan Update: I was freezing in the room and kept getting distracted by how cold it was bc I didn’t know they don’t like us bringing jackets.

Oh also I got kicked out of the test mid section twice, including a RC one where I was in middle of answering for a passage, so I had a 10min interruption where I forgot what I was reading before resuming….If I lost points I blame that

It doesn’t feel real. It’s like 12 hours away and I have not felt an ounce of panic or even true worry. My mind refuses to comprehend this is happening :D Hope this continues even when I’m sitting at the exam table lol. Just pretend I’m taking a drill, focus, and chill as always. Delusion—convince yourself!

The way I thought I was reading an easy passage bc of my sociology background with a subtle focus on communications….

Anyway I got this wrong bc I choose B initially but talked myself out of it when a word search for conscious didn’t have it in passage A. lol. The rest were decently intuitive. Also didn’t know what prevaricating meant rip, I thought it was like premeditated intent or something ugh, I need to stop second guessing on MC questions

@JoshLSATCopium my spirit animal 🙏🏻 Unfortunately I did get this question wrong tho lol

@Limabean I was thinking that too but the prompt does indeed say "THE law regarding contributions" not a law, so there is only one set of rules and it is the one they have set out for us

I see that their new company philosophy is to 脱裤子放屁

Explanation: all you’re doing is farting(testing us) and yet you insist on taking off your pants (making 100 changes to the UI design)

@studying4lsat123 okay it’s like a crack theory but potentially: using more does not make it more effective, thus people will not be incentivized to use more than they need, rebate=refunding the amount they didn’t use up, so if something does not incentivize people to use it up, they are more likely to qualify for rebate, which would damage company profit.

When I first came across this question, I didn’t know what rebate is. After googling during BR, I still don’t know what it means in this context. But I found that if you replace it with “offering everyone a rubber ducky will not increase…” it works just as well and in fact made it easier for me to conclude C. But granted, that means crossing out the words therefore and consequently, but I can’t do much with those words when I don’t know the definition in the first place.

The ducky will not increase sales and be a waste of money.

So you’re assuming no one will be tempted to buy the ointment even if we offer them a ducky with every purchase?

Also replacing it with the word discount works

soooo the principle is someone convicted of a wrongdoing should off set the harm they've done somehow as a byproduct of...not even their own action, just something they either do is done to them?

there are too many things that don't line up, writing memoir(the source of the offsetting action) is not even close to the same thing as being punished, and a charity chosen by a third party doesn't offset the harm they have done. giving money to 1000 should not be comparable to taking the life of 1, heck, the third party in question isn't even specified to be the one who was harmed by the criminal. it could be totally unrelated to the harm they have done, what if they sexually assaulted a woman and the money is going to sea pollution?

so it's missing the punishment aspect and the completely offsetting, which made it read super weird for me. like yeah it can make sense but i'd have to turn off parts of my brain for it, the same way someone can have an attractive face only if they have a mask on.

C: I didn't see how this was correct bc what if by everyone coming to discuss, all the countries ganged up on one country to bare the cost and they agreed out of survival? what if someone said we'll bomb you unless you do this, or we'll all stop you from doing trade and ruin you economically unless you alone bear responsibility. a country could be going along with something unwillingly, just because we did something didn't mean we would have willingly done it had the establishment of a gang of countries not been in the pic. also, more importantly, who's to say they will actually follow those agreements?

I chose B because it said no nation was willing to bare the cost

Why not make this a vocab test at this rate?

It keeps giving giant paragraphs that are walls of text instead of concise bullet point breakdown feedbacks even after I explicitly told it to…Would also like option to clear chat history or start new chat.

Add me as well thanks!

I’m down as well! Plan to take it in August but might retake in September, LA based