I can definitely use the help, trying to get to min 155 for the June LSAT

I am really interested if you have time! I also take the LSAT in June and looking for a minimum 155.

I would be interested as well. I take it for the first time in June.

If you negate A, how does that not wreck her argument. The premise is that the dam will stop the flooding. If you negate A, then it will stop the flooding everywhere, but Rochelle so the flooding will continue so her argument is gone. #help

I think like the SAT, the LSAT is just another standardized test that does not relate to being able to graduate law school or pass the BAR.

Just a fun fact: Not a lawyer yet obviously, but I am pretty sure that if a witness gives a statement that the defendant did something like in this instance threatened her. If the defendant does not object to that claim by the witness then it is allowed as fact in court and would not be objected as hearsay. So correct me if I am wrong, but it would make C wrong in this question in real life, but this is just a scenario in this argument which is correct for this question.

The amount of time to read the stem, stimulus, and answers while trying to compute it into lawgic and back to english is not really available in reality. By reading the question and answers without doing any of that, you can get the answer correct a good amount of time. So the idea will be to try to use your intuition with the conclusion for questions that have a lot of reading/analyzing. Lawgic is good for some questions, but can actually confuse you/lose time on some questions so use your best judgement when you see questions. I tried using lawgic on the last little quiz and got 4 out of 5 wrong since I was rushing with time/analyzing the question. I got 4 out of 5 right on the next quiz with just intuition. Try both ways to see whats best for you, don't box yourself in with lawgic on every question unless you see a small stimulus with just lawgic sentences. I will go back and study the forms and indicators to see if that helps making the analyzing quicker for larger stimulus', but I doubt it. Just my take from studying.

D&D are terrible writers. The GoT book content stopped after season 6. Therefore, Season 7 and 8 were terrible.

I am still having trouble understanding why AC A would not be right. If more the floorboards survived from big houses than smaller houses. We can correctly assume they were made from better material which would cost more in a large amount of circumstances which supports these floors being a status symbol. AC B leaves an assumption, they might not be the cheapest, but they could be cheap. Someone from the small house could say they got the narrow boards since they are cheaper than the big ones. Could not afford the big ones which makes them not a status symbol and weakens the argument. I understand to a point why B is correct, just not why it is better than A. #help TY