I also had to google these guys

I was having a hard time too. Something that helped me was to focus on the word "one" used at the beginning of the stimulus; it indicates that "ONE of the things lenders do when evaluating the risk of potential borrowers defaulting on a loan is to consider credit score". With this we can say, okay so these guys use credit score to assess if they should lend to someone or not but, this credit score is only one aspect they consider. Now compare that to the mortgage lenders who "are much less likely to consider risk factors other than credit score when considering borrowers with high credit score". If we put these two pieces of info together, it all makes sense: lenders have a more wholistic view of a potential borrower where as the mortgage dudes are less likely to do so and more likely to base their decision on just credit scores. I hope that helps...

C also felt like a reasonable A.C. I am having a hard time understanding why it is wrong.

Loved the Toronto shout out... This one got me. They all seemed to resolve the paradox. Comments were helpful and great point from @bstampfl

"Also notice that (B) is the only AC that did not directly or indirectly address both of the towns. This is not a coincidence."

Yes you are right, good catch. Good to be aware of the difference between

BT ---causes----> SF and BT---->SF

The principal claims that it is the bad teaching that is causing the student failures. But bad teaching does't mean there will always be student failures. Like JY says in the video, maybe the students got great tutors, or started to really work hard due to the lack of good teaching. Many other factors could account for students improvement in the school. A causal relationship can't be contraposed the same way we can with a conditional relationship.

... One region is respecting physical distancing rules and another region the moose and deer are on top of each other.

Hey, thanks for the response! It is reassuring coming back to this question 5 months later and seeing the obvious mistake in my logic :) There is improvement!

https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-75-section-3-question-19/

Reminds me of the N.A from this question.

George Carlin, but I still love you JY.

On my timed run NONE of this information could sink in. I was beat after the last three passages. Coming back to this passage later, it is at least encouraging to see how it actually does make sense. Now it's a matter of building stamina with RC.

#help but wouldn't D also provide this reason for finding more errors? If there were more editors checking over the work, more errors would be picked up on.... no?

Is this question similar to PT C2 (1996) question 15?

The question is about dramatic novels and science fiction...

#help

Now I know my A - B - E's ... Jy you are the best man.

really? I just listed to a podcast, "the legal level" and they said you cannot use this function.

Anyone else hear "you have a paradox side by side"? ...too much LSAT studying ...

Are you guys coming back and doing the low resolution review on your blind review?

this is great

#help

I have written it as

SF---->BT

SF -----> BT

is this okay too? want to make sure I am not mixing up sufficient and necessary

Another easy correct answer choice if I would have just read carefully! Good reminder.

#help the only heading I see for a "biconditional" lesson doesn't come for a while. Is there a biconditional lesson before this? I have worked my way through every lesson but do not recall these biconditionals. Could someone help me out / remind me which lesson we have seen these?

Anyone else in Toronto? Would love to join in!