Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - robbief

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 21
Oh.  This has complicated things...

Studying for the LSAT / Re: SABBATH LSAT
« on: October 05, 2004, 03:07:08 PM »
haha, not a definitely don't need to "check in".  Respond whenever you feel like it.

hope that helps!! 

I always thought HTH was something snide, but in's not at all.

it stands for "i don't spend enough time on LSD."


(hope that helps, by the way)

But I feel like with my 212 posts, I spend far too much time on this site... my girlfriend thinks I like this site more than her.  Anyways, it seems people were born knowing what HTH means, but I guess god forgot to give me that gene.  Since no one has ever said what it means, and always assumed that it's universal, even if I spent more hours on this site, I still wouldn'd know what it is.

What does "HTH" stand for?

Studying for the LSAT / Re: SABBATH LSAT
« on: October 05, 2004, 11:26:40 AM »
I feel the one about other expenses was wrong bc we have no way of knowing whether or not that was taken into account. 

If I ask for five dollars for a chocolate bar bc the price went up, the fact that I also have to pay my cable and electrical bills that are more expnsive this month (which is sorta what E was saying) says nothing about where the money's going.  But if you say, well you don't even know if the store sells chocolate bars, it would ceratinly seem to cast doubt upon the fact that I need 5 dollars to buy one for sure.

I don't know how clear that analogy is.  But the fact that D (I think) raised the doubt that a tuition hike  was definitely necassary (which is what the argument said) bc it's possible that it's not needed if there are enough students.

About the match the flaw one... I don't remember anything about lawyer departments, but what I can say is that sounds EXACTLY like the stimulus.  While I remember thinking the baseball one was perfect, I also think that if it sounds EXACTLY like the stimulus (allocating the best workers to the best department), it's usually wrong.  Do you remember why you ruled out the baseball one?

Anyone else have any takes on it?

Studying for the LSAT / Re: SABBATH LSAT
« on: October 05, 2004, 09:16:01 AM »
It definitely did.  My PS instructor asked PS and they told him that LSAT somehow takes this into account.  I think for this test, the test may be pre-curved according to how the general population did on the sections when they were experimentals. 

Studying for the LSAT / Re: SABBATH LSAT
« on: October 05, 2004, 09:09:58 AM »
Yeah... the argument went along the lines of with only 16% of the votes, we can't have the 30% of the funds we'd need.

the assumption is that the 16% WON'T or CANNOT donate what 30% would or could.  If they could, his argument would fall apart. 

Right?  It was an assumption question?  I don't remember it exactly, but I think that answer fit.  if it was a weaken question, than it probably said "COULD"  or "WOULD." 

Studying for the LSAT / Re: SABBATH LSAT
« on: October 05, 2004, 08:24:15 AM »
hey heyhey...
My experimental was Rc -- it as IMPOSSIBLE...

I think the answer to your question was something like he assumes (I don't remember if it was an assumption question or what...) that 16% of the people couldn't donate as much money as the 30% they would typically need.  It was something like that.  I don't know know what letter that answer was.

Studying for the LSAT / Re: SABBATH LSAT
« on: October 05, 2004, 07:04:33 AM »
bump....anyone else out there who remembers something about this test?

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... 21