The problem with B, as I had seen it, is that the home-lighting industry's profits have very little bearing towards evaluating the argument which claims "everyone should use low-wattage bulbs." It would be extremely nice to know the actual individual costs of low-wattage bulbs or the costs of burning low-wattage bulbs. (C and A respectively), since price is clearly articulated as a point of concern earlier in the argument (it would be nice to gauge just how much more expensive low-wattage is over normal bulbs).

The average life expectancy (E) would also be nice to know, as how long a low-wattage bulb lasts is a key consideration to costs (not only would it be inconvenient, but also pricy to keep switching). I could see how C might seem a little iffy, but at the very least, the opinions of actual low-wattage bulb users would provide at least some insight into evaluating whether or not everyone should make the switch.

Ultimately B doesn't really help. Why should one care about the profits the home-lighting industry expects from the switch? Should we assume that because they expect some amount of profit, there is some ulterior motive and that ulterior motive should sway one's evaluation of whether or not to make the switch?

Okay, follow up on my previous post on LR. I think I mixed up topics since a lot of the topics I attributed to the 26 LR actually belonged to a 25 LR, which was supposedly real according to the powerscore guys.

Here are some real 25 question topics (there seemed to be two real 25s?): Blameworthiness, spelling ability to predict academic ability, psychics vs psychologists, chemical plant, beans and amino acids, disease incidence in opossums, iron and rock meteorites, rainfall and temperature changes/summer humidity levels, apparent generosity, GHB and heart disease.

Here are experimental topics: : roasted chicken, tyranny.

A different section had this: Moas, Earth and its hot core, tickets on overseas time shares, ducks getting stuck in fishing nets, California vs cockney dialects.

A different section: vitamin E and broccoli, a country should classify a species as endangered.

Possible different section: Yoncole Fruit juice w/ added sugars and coloring, lucid dreaming and moral culpability, characteristics of a persuasive speaker

Please double check and @ me if this sounds about right, it's around the 47:10 mark for the real ones and 51:10 for experimentals. Lmk if the any of the topics on the experimental seemed to belong to a 26 Q LR.

@ said:

@ said:

Okay I recall some details on my LR sections:

26 LR: Disease incidence in mountain and lowland oppossums, mayor using offensive terms, iron vs rock meteorites, stone tools.

25 LR: Fruit juice with added colors, moral culpability during lucid dreaming, moral behavior and severe harm.

Some other questions that I remember but don't recall which sections: firing employees at a news station to save costs, paleolithic fishing/agriculture.

If you had a single lr, please @ if any of these ring a bell. If you had dubs and both ring a bell, please lmk what topics went to which sections and if you can recall any others.

I only had one LR and your first topics sound familiar as well as a question about children vs adults learning through play if that rings a bell for you. My only LR had 26q.

Yikes, the adults vs children learning through play does ring a bell. If that was in the 26Q and was your only LR, that's a little unfortunate since I definitely found the 26Q one to be harder.

Seems like no? They were already transitioning away from paper and pen and if they did go to back to in person, it would probably be in reduced capcities and presumably on tablet like they were doing pre-pandemic.

I would work under the assumption that the LSAT is going to continue being proctored digital for the forseeable future.

Okay I recall some details on my LR sections:

26 LR: Disease incidence in mountain and lowland oppossums, mayor using offensive terms, iron vs rock meteorites, stone tools.

25 LR: Fruit juice with added colors, moral culpability during lucid dreaming, moral behavior and severe harm.

Some other questions that I remember but don't recall which sections: firing employees at a news station to save costs, paleolithic fishing/agriculture.

If you had a single lr, please @ if any of these ring a bell. If you had dubs and both ring a bell, please lmk what topics went to which sections and if you can recall any others.

@ said:

Alright looks like the ban is over, so I'll post the contents of my exam and maybe they'll be useful to somebody.

LR-RC-LG-RC

LR: 26 questions. Few topics I can remember: goats in the fertile crescent/Azerbaijan, sperm whales and orcas in different regions, patterns for popular startup companies, something about coal. A little on the hard side? Felt like there were some tricky questions, moreso than usual but I'm pretty bad at discerning LR difficulty.

RC: Functional extinction, Rap/Rakim, redoing psych experiments, neuroimaging. Not too bad? Maybe a single tricky question per passage but nothing crazy.

LG: I never remember the first game, presentations, Assignment of senior VPs to juniors, Wed/Thursday Work Schedules. First three were fine but I can see how the third can be tricky. Had to brute force most of the last but thankfully finished with time. Pretty fundamental section with some tricky rules. I think knowing when to skip and when to trust your gut was key here.

RC: Indigenous sovereignty, work hours & consumerism, whig history, hydrogen cars. Probably leaning on the difficult side, especially the first passage and maybe the third passage. Key was definitely spending more time on the questions than the passage.

From what it looks like online, the last RC was probably real? Honestly pretty ambivalent as to which one is the experimental. All I'm hoping was that I went -0/-1 on LG and my LR+RC wasn't too bad. Honestly predicting the last RC will tip the curve -1 but doubt the LG and LR will adjust the curve in any way. Will just have to wait Thursday for Powerscore's curve prediction.

Okay, having listened to the powerscore podcast it looks like I had the harder combo of LG and RC. Both real LGs seemed to loosen your scale by -1 and both RCs by -1 (the real one in my case was in fact the second I mentioned). LR seemed to neither loosen nor tighten the scale for everybody. In any case, this confirmed my suspicion that Nov was mildly harder than Oct.

Alright looks like the ban is over, so I'll post the contents of my exam and maybe they'll be useful to somebody.

LR-RC-LG-RC

LR: 26 questions. Few topics I can remember: goats in the fertile crescent/Azerbaijan, sperm whales and orcas in different regions, patterns for popular startup companies, something about coal. A little on the hard side? Felt like there were some tricky questions, moreso than usual but I'm pretty bad at discerning LR difficulty.

RC: Functional extinction, Rap/Rakim, redoing psych experiments, neuroimaging. Not too bad? Maybe a single tricky question per passage but nothing crazy.

LG: I never remember the first game, presentations, Assignment of senior VPs to juniors, Wed/Thursday Work Schedules. First three were fine but I can see how the third can be tricky. Had to brute force most of the last but thankfully finished with time. Pretty fundamental section with some tricky rules. I think knowing when to skip and when to trust your gut was key here.

RC: Indigenous sovereignty, work hours & consumerism, whig history, hydrogen cars. Probably leaning on the difficult side, especially the first passage and maybe the third passage. Key was definitely spending more time on the questions than the passage.

From what it looks like online, the last RC was probably real? Honestly pretty ambivalent as to which one is the experimental. All I'm hoping was that I went -0/-1 on LG and my LR+RC wasn't too bad. Honestly predicting the last RC will tip the curve -1 but doubt the LG and LR will adjust the curve in any way. Will just have to wait Thursday for Powerscore's curve prediction.

LG-LR-LR-RC

LG: food specials, teams, cities, plants: thought it was alright, felt standard.

LRs: Don't remember anything. First was 26, second was 25. Hoping the 25 one was the real one. Lmk if you had a similar test or remember topics.

RC: Mali, evolution, short stories, paternalism. I thought it was okay? Hoping I'm not crazy

Overall, felt like a balanced test. @ me if you have any insight into the double lrs.

@ said:

Everyone online saying that the LG completely destroyed them is making me really nervous about the fact that I thought I did alright on them. Feeling super paranoid but trying to push that feeling aside.

If you felt fine going through you're probably good. The reality is that most people who bother to say anything right after the exam are the ones who know they didn't do so hot. No sense in letting other peoples' post test pessimism get to you.

It's past 9 EST on 10/14. Is it cool to talk now? Just iffy because I know there's a lot of retake shenanigans going on.

No one becomes a master just like that. It's good that you understand explanations but that doesn't really mean much if you can't put that understanding to use in a timed setting.

Like the above posters said, volume and repetition is key. The core curriculum on 7sage is good for just broadly covering the kinds of games you'll see and their overarching strategies but past that, LG depends on you being diligent. After a pt, do take the time to see if there's an "intelligent" way to solve games while going through them during your blind review (aim to perfect LG in your Blind Review score).

Afterwards, review JY's explanations and see if you got the "big" inference, if there were any, and if there was anything you overlooked. Imo, LG out of every section benefits the most from consistent drilling. On days you're not PTing, I highly recommend drilling full sections, BRing those, then evaluating how you did. Keep yourself honest on whether or not you actually understood the game. If you got something wrong, foolproof it. If there was a "smarter" way to do a game that could've saved time, foolproof it. A day or two after, foolproof the same games. (I recommend full sections over individual games simply because it builds stamina, just taking a single game is a totally different mental experience from taking four back to back in 35 minutes).

Progress isn't linear and it can get frustrating feeling yourself stagnate. It happened to me and at that point when you feel like you're ramming against a wall, disengage from LG Drills and work on something else. Eventually you'll get to a point where taking a full section doesn't tire you out too much and you can confidently tackle whatever's thrown at you.

tl;dr Repitition, volume, foolproof. Do lots of different games. If you're brute forcing everything, that's a sign you don't really get it.

Used Chrome, had a popup once in my second section, but I was already finished and double checking so no harm done. I went through three proctors for some reason but all were pretty chill. LR-RC-LG-RC. Felt fine more or less through the whole thing but I was aiming for a really high score. Going to have to decide whether to cancel depending on Powerscore's curve predictions.

Yes, you can use a mechanical pencil and I've heard lined paper is fine, since you have to show both anyways during the initial security check.

Pretty much ^. I just typed in the chat that I'll be walking out of my room. Go to the bathroom, take a deep breath, hydrate, stretch and get the blood flowing. Go back inside, check in before the timer is up, your proctor will go through another security scan before they take remote control of your computer to type a password to let you continue.

It's past 9 EST, is it cool to discuss broad topics, relative difficulty and theorize experimentals now?

Wrote mine for 12:10 PST. No problems, thankfully. Felt significantly better than August.

Two days before I really wouldn't recommend it. Probably would be better to just really review your last pt and spend your last amount of time drilling lightly like the others have said while tapering off the closer you get to your test day.

Realistically, are you really going to learn much from a test in only two days? Doing a little light work on Wednesday and chilling on Thursday would probably be better.

Conjuring a 170+ for October. Let's get this bread.