How do we translate these 3 into diagrams?

I understand that the correct answer tacks the conclusion. But how does C not play a role in completing the logic of the conclusion? Since it (if assumed true) would connect the two premises together to support the conclusion.

Is there a form that follows:

A‑m→B

A←s→C

--------

A←s→C?

confused why the some negative isn't the same as in previous lesson:

Original: P ←s→ C

Negated: /(P ←s→ C)

Negated: P → /C

Am I missing something? how the excerpt above become incorrect negation for unicorns and poop example?

really seems like the principle supports two different conclusions whether it is legal to strike... H: it is legal because very few exceptions because of xyz reason . M: well I think it is illegal because of xyzzy reason...

I really dont understand - BUT NOT CONSUMED - it means all coal you mined - PERIOD. If there is less coal in inventory in 1990 compared to 1991 it just means in 1990 you mined 100 coal and in 1991 you mined 80. I don't understand how we are meant to presume 20 coal was consumed - it just means 20 less of it was mined. No?