i am tired of this nonsense

@steamboatwillie You and me both!

I selected A because C was too incomplete for what I was looking for. Even though A says "necessary", that mirrors Parent Q's conclusive language ("..would become obsolete...").

I don't care that I got it wrong - it's good to know why, etc, but I do care when the explanations for answer gaps are so thin and the explanations for the wrong answers are so weak.

If you a necessary/sufficient explanation is used in the explanation, it makes sense to map out the logic used in the gap explanation.

There is some weak sauce explanation as to why D is wrong.

The only way D is supported by B is that there is any government regulation - however irrelevant to the stimulus - at all. That's the only way it's true.

The 30% figure in P4 describes a typical composition, not a regulatory allowance. The passage mentions tight regulation but never specifies what the permitted limits actually are, so there's no basis for the claim in either direction.

I agree that E is correct, but when an answer choice is this close, I'd appreciate a more accurate explanation - this makes me feel like I actually eliminated D because E is 5th answer down and I have 5 fingers.

Please prove me wrong.

TIL "overlap in the ranges" refers to the geographic range, and not the range between species.

If we're expected to know that "range" is standard ecological terminology for geographic territory, then that same standard should require it to be used unambiguously. The sentence structure here - "overlap in the ranges of moose and white-tailed deer" - reads more naturally as referring to a range of the species themselves, as in population counts, which is exactly the kind of ambiguity that ecological terminology is supposed to eliminate. You can't invoke a technical standard selectively.

Happy to be proved wrong!

@stringcheesed I got this correct, but I was hesitant to because of how strongly it was worded.

Curious what you ultimately picked - I had eliminated the answers down to A and C, but after reading again, it seemed to be obvious that it wasn't A.

It would be cool if they showed you when you interacted with the answer selections so we could better remember how we worked through eliminating options.

@SMRegalado X would agree, but M doesn't have an opinion on outdoor seating = eliminate

If we're using conditional logic to justify a method of reasoning in the stimulus and to eliminate answer selections, mapping that logic out would be super helpful for those of us who are more visual learners.

You're slapping me around with bricks of text - either give me a diagram or a puppy pic pls (preferably both)

Reasoning for A is a bit of a cheesy hand wave - even if you tack on 50 years to the total, 55,000,050 years is still considered "55 million years"

That said, I'm totally being pedantic, and B is the better answer choice.

@David_Busis Is this number impacted when the drill analytics is reset from the preferences menu?

@Kevin_Lin Not sure if someone has thanked you today for your explanations, videos, and reddit presence, but man. Thank you.

Your explanations have generally been helpful with drills and misc questions, but especially across PT147 S4, I've been able to understand conclusion/premise mapping, gaps, and my mistakes faster.

Still - this one was incredibly dense.

Feels like a bit of a cop-out. Negation testing is a verification tool, not a discovery tool. You use it to confirm a likely answer, not to go fishing through all five choices.

@Kevin_Lin any opportunities for a revision on approach?

@7SageTutor It's confusing when the main explanation for the correct answer is "Negated...", but the explanations for the other answers don't mention why negation wasn't considered/doesn't work.

A recommendation is made in P3:

I agree that C is a stronger answer, but unless the passage is required to say "I recommend" for a recommendation, there is a recommendation & the explanation for B not being correct is weak.

...unique set of qualifications.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Explanation for this is butt. If you're going to initiate the written explanations with "Wrong trigger", then map the logic to connect the dots.

/share → treatment delay → MAY suffer unnecessarily

∴ keep confidential = wrong

^ shows that E is valid. E is not correct because the conclusion doesn't mention the company.

Really helps when the answer descriptions are built from the perspective of why someone would select the option instead of why they're incorrect. Not doing so could lead to an incomplete answer analysis - like this.

Happy to be proven wrong.

I've seen so many explanations that a gap is identified as a "cookie-cutter flaw" that I'm starting to want chocolate chip cookies.

@Kevin_Lin Might be an opportunity for actual merch like 7sage-branded cookie cutter to help lighten the mood on score drop days.

This comes across as lazy polling instead of a direct ask with a survey, but I’ll bite.

Shuffle remaining nodes that consider actual progress: I‘ll sometimes dive into different lessons that make sense to me but aren’t suggested as next steps. I’d like to adjust the study plan on the fly with both what I’ve skipped and what I’ve reviewed to redistribute the suggested nodes. Maybe even a button to shuffle the remaining nodes (if applicable).

Might be an opportunity for an occasional point of feedback (e.g., A thumbs up/down for new shuffles, or a feedback text entry on redistributions that included more updates than a “basic” shuffle). But of course, respecting the attention and not repeatedly beating them over the head with prompts.

Add a timer toggle: I wouldn’t think that it’s intentional, but this service and supporting platforms don’t appear to be designed with neurodivergent users in mind. The steps provided by the study scheduler are excellent milestones, but adding a time factor without a toggle to remove it can be considered structural/systemic ableism. As a tangent: It’s astounding that there’s still a timer ticking away even when a drill is created with unlimited time.

That said, I appreciate the ability to pop open a chat window and ask a question.

@Anthony.pardella@gmail.com Study > Lesson Library > Foundations > Disjunction (or)

Totally get the frustration of feeling stuck...test prep is brutal. That said, posts like this make it harder for people who genuinely need accommodations to be taken seriously. The process is already an uphill battle without the perception that people can game the system.

If you're hitting a wall, it might be worth stepping away for a bit and leaning into something you enjoy. Letting yourself subconscious process in the background can lead to some breakthroughs, and coming back fresh does more for your score than grinding through burnout.

That said, if you genuinely believe that you need assistance, there are more effective channels to accomplish that. It might be in your best interest to delete this post.

Wishing everyone here good luck in a way that doesn't come at someone else's expense 💙