This question has me seeing red, but I don't know which shade.

Process of Elimination question.

"Since" is a premise indicator, and it would be the answer if E were pointed directly at "some gov't control is needed".

Although D flails about, it is descriptively more accurate than the others.

The gap is the meaning of risk.

Melinda talks about financial risk.

Jack talks about risk related to an actual fire.

I considered "judiciously spreading" (A) because dollars to doughnuts, a guy that misunderstands Melissa's straightforward statement also doesn't understand what "judiciously" means.

I actually selected "decreases" (D) probably because Jack's an idiot, but more likely out of spite because I'm so tired of drills.

#TeamMelissa

Way to go!

This sounds like a great opportunity from a great resource.

Congrats to the newbies!

Thank you! This is great

Great job!

@Nathan1138 The only thing that matters is how YOU perform on test day - people coughing/test format changes/someone standing up and freaking out because they got 2 RC sections (srsly happened) - everything else is noise.

I wouldn't say that I suffered - it was more of an inconvenience. I was pretty locked in and it was a pretty smooth experience after the initial hiccups.

You'd be surprised at how you can take different practice tests in different formats all with their different quirks, but you'll get a similar score. I had to prove it to myself, so I printed off a few practice tests and answered questions in different places. I even took timed PTs at a McDonald's. The score reveal after grading felt like a magic trick - similar scores.

Good luck, my dude!

@Nathan1138 I would take anything you can see on the updated formatting version of the practice test on the LawHub platform as gospel. I wasn't able to hide my timer on the exam, but I'm able to do it now during the practice tests on LawHub.

From what I understand, August was the first primarily in-person test since pre-COVID. They had to update the formatting of the exam at least between days 1 and 2 due to an issue that needed to be corrected. Unfortunately, when one issue is quickly patched with a complex website, other things can break. It's possible that my issue was related to that, but I didn't feel like I didn't get a fair chance.

If you click on the clock of the timer, the numbers should disappear. That function currently works if you opened a new PT on LawHub, so I would assume that to be the case going forward.

Whatever platform you're using to study, work through a timed PT on LawHub's platform before the actual exam - it will give you the closest possible experience to test day. 7Sage is doing a great job with the effort they're putting into replicating that experience, but the best way to experience the format of the exam is to take it on the platform you'll be using (LawHub).

@haena They can do whatever they want - just give me my full screen button back lol

The way it's trending, we might eventually be taking it in Morse code!

@haena I think there were some formatting changes after the first day to address other issues with the RC question dividers not showing up. If they changed that after the first day, it's possible they didn't stop tweaking settings as the tests continued, but I took mine on the 8th. I also wasn't able to hide the countdown timer!

The current format on the LawHub platform for their practice tests is how I saw the exam presented.

@Kevin_Lin I took June and August in-person using provided Prometric's equipment. The widths were similar (stretched across the screen), but the full screen option made it less of an issue in June vs August (with no option to go full screen).

Both times were comparable to LawHub's formatting of the post-June formatting of the PrepTests (with the left-hand navigation column removed). Although it's definitely more user-friendly, 7Sage's current layout is not representative of what was experienced in August or is currently in-use on the LawHub platform.

The formatting of this exam was a bit jarring, but the removal of the full screen option will eventually be seen as improvements. I've got a new conspiracy theory that the last minute changes were planned to thwart evildoers and to save the world.

The lack of the full screen option was incredible - LSAC buried this nugget in the August instruction email: "Also, as with previous test administrations, full screen mode functionality is not available." ...but nothing about full screen was mentioned in the June instruction email, and I used full screen on the June test (I use full screen + passage only view to initially read RC passages).

What wasn't mentioned: The option to hide the timer by clicking on it wasn't available for me across this entire exam.

Although a bit jarring at first, it ultimately wasn't a huge deal. I did lose a few minutes trying to get the text situated to where I didn't have to squint or scroll to read the answer selections. I had to stop fiddling with the highlighter colors/stick to one - but I absolutely felt punished for using the tools they provided.

If LSAC is going to be sticklers for the testing format, it would be helpful if they were consistent on the format with the drills (still pre-June).

One of my biggest mistakes was not taking the last of my pre-exam PTs on LawHub like I did for the exam in June, but I'm a little burned out.

The current 7Sage drill might be too narrow compared to LawHub's presentation formatting - maybe the intended dimensions were swapped? I wish there was a horizontal limit on the exam that I took, but it was like watching a widescreen movie on a small TV.

7Sage:

LawHub (elements removed to better represent what I saw on the August exam):

The stimulus analysis on this question clued me into the LR Logic Tags in the Lesson Library under Logic Reasoning (towards the bottom)

I've "done my homework", but that's a new section since I worked the foundations - and I see there are quite a bit more drill questions and further explanations.

I take the August LSAT in 12 hours - what a time to discover that module existed...

..I mean, what else has been updated that I missed‽

haaaahahahaha

I want to cry

So LSAT considers "Estimate" the equivalent as "Calculate". Odd, but I'll roll with it.

AND it's one of the 150+ PTs! Solid, my dude!

Don't undermine your achievement - even that EXP is great

Entirely anecdotal, but out of 10+ LSAT problems with prescriptive answer wording (should/ought), all but one or 2 have been incorrect.

I was split between B and D - surely an opinion of someone who already uses the bulb (meaning: already purchased) - weighs less than numbers that can be interpreted. This would be true especially if the homeowner benefits were objectively known to be "enormous".

Nope.

"We" is assumed to be human - I thought polar bears were speaking.

I don't know if this is a recent thing, but this question is included in the Lesson Library (Menu at the top: Study > Lesson Library > Logical Reasoning > Transitioning to Most Strongly Supported Questions > currently 4th lesson in the section)

When I first decided to study for the LSAT 6 months ago, I jumped into LR after skimming the Foundation and LR lessons (don't do this). After 1000s of questions and resetting my question analytics (don't do this either), I'm reviewing the lessons after some recent 7Sage website updates. This question popped up again - it was among the first where I had answered incorrectly after digging deep with minimal interaction with LSAT material.

I think it was a split decision between A and C.

Although I got this question wrong when I first started - I was SO sure that I was right - the correct answer practically jumped out to me after the lessons/working through the examples and provided drills from the Main Conclusion and the Transition to MSS.

It can be discouraging, but don't give up. Different methods work better for different people - find out what works for you to improve, and be kind to yourself.

It does get easier.

Looking through some of the drills in the 7Sage Foundations and was catfished with Comic Sans

Jokes aside - this isn't the real font (I used a browser extension to change the text to Comic Sans, because of course that exists).

Just having some fun, not trying to add stress to test week for anyone!

Head's up - the provided Summary's Lawgic is incorrect.

The question analysis maps out the Lawgic like this:

exercise -m-> calm mind -s→ lower stress -s→ lower BP

2 issues:

• 1. Unclear modifier: The quantifier between [Calm Mind] and [Lower Stress] isn't clear (verify by watching the explanation video), so it's possible that it's All ( -> )

• 2. Incorrect notation: The Some quantifier is bi-directional: exercise -m-> calm mind -> lower stress <-s-> lower BP

Corrected Lawgic:

exercise -m-> calm mind -> lower stress <-s-> lower BP

The reasoning for the answer selection E says that it's "strongly supported", but it attempts to justify flowing from Most to Some (exercise -m-> calm mind <-s-> lower stress), and that's not possible.

But.

You can flow from Most to All - and although it's not strongly supported, it is the most strongly supported answer.

So considering the corrected Lawgic:

exercise -m-> calm mind -> lower stress

(E) "For at least some people, engaging in exercise can cause their stress levels to be reduced" is valid.

Happy to discuss/update if that's not accurate.

What about a discount for subscribers? :D

First things that come to mind to avoid studying:

Hot drink mug or tumbler: "Sufficient for Coffee, Necessary for Survival."

Shirt ideas/slogans/various sticker ideas:

• "Well Ackchyually" meme dude with Necessary ≠ Sufficient

• "Assume Nothing" with a small asterisk that says "except this shirt is soft."

• "Negativity Is My Love Language (LSAT Edition)."

• "Not All Heroes Wear Capes. Some Do. That's the Negation."

• "I Don't Have Trust Issues, I Have Negation Issues."

• "It's Not That Deep. Wait, Negate That."

• "I'm not Sufficient. I'm Necessary."

I skipped most of the Foundation lessons before cherry picking LR lessons and am currently fighting for my life with Necessary/Sufficient assumption questions.

Back to the depths I go..!

@NoNamed92 Woo wow. I haven't broken down the answer selections like that yet - I don't think that I need to, but it seems like a solid thing to know.

Do you remember where you saw it broken down like that?

Nope!

Think of it less as a "writing sample" and more like LSAC's Wrong Answer Journal about applicants. Everyone says they always review their WAJ, but nobody actually looks until the week before the exam.

LSAC lets law schools see them, so somewhere an admissions officer is judging run-on sentences and making sure you're taking it seriously. I saw somewhere that admissions won't always look, but the chances are higher if it's down to the wire between applicants and/or to make sure it's an actual essay and on topic vs what someone could remember from the Declaration of Independence.

@Bruh You are 100% correct!

I've already had double RC on exam day - wasn't expecting to have flashbacks reading about cells and poets in a PT lol