So funny that in the process of calling out LSAC for making problematic assumptions, you make one yourself. Literally what

Yeah, I thought that this was an idiotic question. I got E wrong because I thought to myself, "Well there's certainly no reason that Indian curries will usually be eaten by people of Indian descent and people of Indian descent will usually only eat Indian curries," also coming from an extremely multicultural city, but I guess that reasoning wasn't good enough for LSAC...

yall we broke the curve

i'm just really mad about AC A on question 12--we don't know anything about her contemporaries right? i would've chosen that one but the phrasing of that last part threw me off and i eliminated it because it references something that wasn't even mentioned anywhere in the passage. but i now realize now that the ACs for that question were even more egregious. they really out here being absolute sadists with these questions.

imagine diagramming it correctly but getting it wrong because you filtered out the "false" in the question stem......................................

nausea. SEVERE nausea

I hope the writers of these two passages and their questions experience the uncomfortable feeling that no matter how low they turn down their air conditioning, they never quite feel that cool, comforting sensation of being cold enough.

This is a very good point. There's a GIANT difference between 80s PTs and all other ones. Genuinely the first PT where I began reconsidering my RC skills.

eliminated ac B immediately because i read in a book that words like "primarily" are RED FLAGS because importance is a difficult standard to achieve and we need a provable answer for NA questions. E seems too easy of an AC, but that is the point.

That was a lot of scientific terms to take in, but the passage is relatively straightforward in its flow of information at least. That one passage about faking art...oh boy.

literally just hit me with a brick. i knew that it was an improper inversion right from translating the stimulus, but NONE of the answer choices seemed to make sense. i didn't realize that they could throw curveballs at you and replicate the flaw but change the premises around to make it more difficult to discern. wow. literally HIT me with a brick.

understood the relationship but misunderstood the acs... i was trying to look for an answer choice that exposed the director's logical mismatch with that of the editor, but ended up choosing e, which i now see why it was wrong. i hope there won't be many questions like this on the june lsat.

ngl this is the ONE question that i am genuinely bothered by. i got this right during BR, but i think under timed conditions, it would have been difficult to go through the minutia of what exactly makes one look different in a series of photos. the flash? the color? the fact that it's taken in front of a mirror? who CARES?

i'm so mad at myself. i chose c at first but tricked myself into thinking that it's too strong of an answer choice and chose D instead. gonna go with my gut the next time.

It might be a bug. I had the same issue a few days ago, but noticed that it would successfully create a drill if I limited it to 15 questions at a time.

also the fact that i literally read about poor emily almost dying from an apple in the answer choice made me cackle help 😭😭

the hy-phens in this que-stion thr-ew me off

i still have no idea what this question is talking about. however, the only reason i got this one right was because of process of elimination. d and e are immediately cancelled because they introduce the principle of arnold being refunded no matter what the circumstances are ("even if"). a and b would still result in arnold being refunded. god help me with what c means (didn't start the video yet), but it seems to be the only plausible ac.

dude same. lucked out for the same reason

I got D right but maybe for the wrong reasons? ACs A and E both looked enticing and I didn't even notice the "most" part lol whoops. A is cancelled bc the first and second conditions are necessary conditions. Even though both are true, they aren't sufficient to create a just society. However, one of the conditions in D fails; therefore, we know that the society is unjust.

god i did so many mental gymnastics with ac E as to why mei being a good and regular patron at joel's shop would benefit him when B was the simpler answer choice that was valid. not worth it

I put down E as my first answer then changed it to B because I overthought the wording in the answer choice... that to understand completely is not equivalent to be well-acquainted with. But looking back, that was a dumb assumption to make. Oh well. Sharpening my intuition for next time.

i am so proud of myself for getting this one right. i got the other ones wrong, but this one seemed to be easy enough to map out.

Mental note--several means some. I crossed out the correct AC since it did not include "some" twice and chose the lesser of four evils, B, which ofc was wrong because it does not make sense in retrospect.

sigh I guess this chapter really underscores the importance of conditional logic in LR. I mistakenly chose A and didn't read into the "most" logic like I should have. But that's okay. It's good that I'm catching my weaknesses in this chapter and learning from them. It's a tough section for me personally compared to the others, but I'll get through it.