The explanation for why D is wrong was not helpful if I'm being honest... Since people are paying for the course, do you mind properly explaining why the answer is wrong? This is a common theme among your explainer videos.

Answer choice A is an assumption though. We don't know whether they actually opened a new restaurant or not, its not in the stimulus. This can't be considered a must-be-true question

The "except" in this question threw me off. I read the last sentence of the stimulus to say that people do not defer to journalists unless/except on matters in which they have no direct experience.

JY has helped me tremendously on the LSAT, but again I wish he would put emotions aside when explaining why answer choices are wrong. Just point out why it is correct/incorrect in a calm & collected manner. That would help me follow the explanations so much better

I wish that the LSAT writers valued economy of expression over verbosity. This is the most ironic answer choice I have ever seen.

The LR questions that require an understanding of terms like "constant dollars" are inherently unfair. If the LSAT are to use such terms they should supply the definition within the stimulus. Is this is something that only older LSATs do?

#help (Added by Admin)

I knew the answer was between AC D & E, but I couldn't spot the difference to save my life.

I was between A & D and ended up choosing D. It is so obvious now that A was the correct answer.

Both answer choice C & D are assumptions by nature. I don't understand why it is frowned upon to make an assumption in this instance since it is required by the question. From my understanding the key distinction between C & D is that D refers specifically to humming (which pertains to the stimulus directly) instead of C which is more vague answer choice and only indirectly related.

So in reality this is actually a strengthening question? Answer choice C does not at all weaken the argument that hard tracks increase running speed - it simply builds upon the given explanation and ultimately strengthens the conclusion. This is an ambiguous question stem to say the least.

This was my second time taking the LSAT, and this time it was a disaster. During the second section, the dreaded "connection lost pop-up" box kept reappearing which prevented me from focusing. It did this about 20-30 times. I told the proctor about it, and I was told that nothing could be done, so keep going. So I did, and then began the third section. The proctor somehow got disconnected completely and my exam was halted. After being connected to an entirely new proctor and trying to talk to them, I was allowed to resume but could not regain my focus at all.

I was absolutely livid and ended up fighting with a dismissive/careless LSAC representative over the phone. I filed a complaint, and it was granted on Sunday and I have rescheduled to take the exam on November 23rd. I'm just really shocked by the attitude of the LSAC regarding such a serious issue. They were at fault for disrupting hundreds of test-takers and they have the audacity to be nonchalant about it?

They need to make arrangements for the test to be taken in-person if this problem persists.

This is one of the few questions I've seen where I completely disagree. I still believe that AC "D" is the right answer choice in this instance. AC "E" is also correct. This one was unfair.

This question is more difficult than JY is letting on. Most people that took this question equally chose answers A, B, & C according to the data.

That answer choice indicates there could have been "very little, if any"(oxygen). That's not really possible because the passage indicated that there could not be "even a trace" (oxygen). That makes "very little" (oxygen) an impossibility. This is the only question I have seen so far that I believe the LSAC messed up on. The explanation doesn't make sense.

This question wasn't hard, although the wording of the correct answer choice was so convoluted that I missed it. So frustrating.

The explanation of why AC D was wrong was not very helpful.

I thought we weren't supposed to attack the premises? By questioning the expertise of the computer experts - aren't we doing just that??

#help (Added by Admin)