When I was diagramming, I had Seek out controversy --> demonstrating falsehoods. Is demonstrating falsehoods not a necessary condition?

And then, Genuine CG --> anger the majority.

I hesitated connecting demonstrating falsehoods to anger the majority because they are both on the right side / necessary conditions. How can they be connected?

I holistically understood the question and got it right, but I want to further understand why "not just for its value as an investment" was discarded as the diagramming begun?

I did the correct diagram and contrapositive but when it came time to put it back into english I convinced myself it was C (and then D). Instead of A. In my mind, because the contrapositive chain "skipped" "Good Show", I didn't think A was correct. But in reality, "Good Show" is still necessary in that chain.

Is negation a common practice for strongly supported questions?

I hope that when I return to this in a bit, it will make more sense...