Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: December LSAT takers!  (Read 8186 times)

rush the rushdie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #40 on: December 08, 2008, 02:26:47 PM »
lots of TLS users have been saying section #3 (2nd LG) was the real thing.  damnit i dont know what to believe

andrew978

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 20
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #41 on: December 08, 2008, 03:00:10 PM »
on lawstudents.ca, a lot of people with one LG section recalled questions that seemed to match the "harder" of the 2 LG sections for the rest of us

also keep in mind one persons' 1st section could have been soembody else's 3

rush the rushdie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #42 on: December 08, 2008, 03:04:25 PM »
on lawstudents.ca, a lot of people with one LG section recalled questions that seemed to match the "harder" of the 2 LG sections for the rest of us

also keep in mind one persons' 1st section could have been soembody else's 3

sigh i hope so.  both LG sections killed me, so i dont even know which one to hope for.  i'm gonna go cry in a corner now. :).  i mean, :(

*devo*

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 158
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #43 on: December 08, 2008, 03:08:12 PM »
lots of TLS users have been saying section #3 (2nd LG) was the real thing.  damnit i dont know what to believe

I'd believe TLS since it is a free-for-all over there with everybody divesting lsat material.

The Fresh Prince

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 73
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #44 on: December 08, 2008, 03:22:47 PM »
On TLS, the consensus is definitely that section 3 (2nd LG) was experimental. I've also confirmed with friends who have had only one LG. (Sorry to LSD if this discussion is breaking any rules, I can take it down if need be)
you're wrong. Also, your avatar and your name don't make any sense. Step your game up, son.

rush the rushdie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #45 on: December 08, 2008, 09:16:03 PM »
On TLS, the consensus is definitely that section 3 (2nd LG) was experimental. I've also confirmed with friends who have had only one LG. (Sorry to LSD if this discussion is breaking any rules, I can take it down if need be)

maybe my LG #1 was your LG #2...but assuming we had the two LG sections in the same order, i'm pretty sure LG #2 was real.  eh idk.  i suck at life, including the lsat.

rush the rushdie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #46 on: December 08, 2008, 09:40:54 PM »
On TLS, the consensus is definitely that section 3 (2nd LG) was experimental. I've also confirmed with friends who have had only one LG. (Sorry to LSD if this discussion is breaking any rules, I can take it down if need be)

maybe my LG #1 was your LG #2...but assuming we had the two LG sections in the same order, i'm pretty sure LG #2 was real.  eh idk.  i suck at life, including the lsat.

okay i just spent the last hour searching google caches for the deleted TLS threads, and i read through a few pages, and i feel worse about my LSAT performance now.

heartbreaker

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3817
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #47 on: December 08, 2008, 09:44:16 PM »
Lesson: don't read TLS.

I felt AWFUL about my performance after the June LSAT (this is actually when I discovered TLS). Then I got my score and realized that they were all full of it. This actually may be the reason for my hatred of TLS.

rush the rushdie

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 150
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #48 on: December 08, 2008, 09:46:47 PM »
Lesson: don't read TLS.

I felt AWFUL about my performance after the June LSAT (this is actually when I discovered TLS). Then I got my score and realized that they were all full of it. This actually may be the reason for my hatred of TLS.

god i hope i, too, realize that.  soon. 

heartbreaker

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3817
    • View Profile
Re: December LSAT takers!
« Reply #49 on: December 08, 2008, 09:47:56 PM »
TLS is seriously LSAT-incompetent. You can tell this from their regular LSAT posts as well.