I feel better seeing that I'm not the only one who glazed over A and misread "at the base of trees" as just "in trees"

Isn't it the case that it's impossible to get to any valid conclusion that either group has a quorum?

If we have:

Standards Quorum → 6

Awards Quorum → 7

And their contrapositives:

/6→/Standards Quorum

/7→/Awards Quorum

It looks to me like the only valid inference we can make are about either NOT having a quorum OR the meeting starting at 6 or 7.

Admittedly I struggled a lot with this question in the PT, burned 3 minutes on it and still got it wrong. But the above observation occurred to me in blind review. If I'm correct that seems like a very quick way to rule out all answers except E since A-D all lead to conclusions about inference about a committee having a quorum and E is the only one that is about a committee NOT having a quorum.

The split method is magic

No way this isn't a 5/5 difficulty

Can anyone confirm if this is true or not?