Listen Jacy, your really smart, and like you observed, I don't seem to be on par with your intellegence, after all I go to Brooklyn Law, and your at Emroy. I just don't get LEEWS, I tried it, and I have personally found that its deadweight & instills false confidence, which is risky during exam time.
I find the LEEWS program to be a way for Miller to indoctrinate gullible, afraid, and confused 1Ls. This is how the man came off to me, as if, he had to prove himself not wrong; or placing the burden on the students to prove him not an idiot. The fun catch phrases (UBE/Blender etc.)& super-structure seems to be an unneccesarily complex substitute for reading a transaction, & simply asking "why did the Prof. put that there? hmmmm...?" coupled with a cold-knowledge of the law with practice on hypos/exams.
I like to spot issues as I see them, sometimes there are no conflicting parties, sometimes there is no time to outline 4 Q.'s wasting 40 minutes of exam time planning, sometimes the issues you "Blender" up will be given to you at the end of a long convoluted hypo. Like I said, LEEWS has the potential to make you "Lose" big, its a material risk that requires careful heed, even you conceded that "it doesn't work for non-linear" thinkers. Thats my two cents.
Best of luck on exams, plz no more animus, peace & love