LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Emily Haney-Caron
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 577
  • Joined: Jan 12, 2012
|
#43620
Hi lunsandy,
lunsandy wrote: I am confused why rule 1 website is shorter or equal to voicemail, whereas rule 3 and 4 does not allow equal to. Is it because of the "must be shorter"?
Yep! You got it.
lunsandy wrote:If rule 1 said website target must be shorter than its voicemail target then it would be same as rule 2 and 3? What in rule 1 indicates that there can be equal to? Is it the "can"?

Thanks!
Basically, yes. This is the difference between "must be shorter" (no equal to allowed) and "can't be longer" (therefore could either be shorter or be the same). Does that make sense?
 Shannon Parker
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: Jun 08, 2016
|
#43636
lunsandy wrote:Hi Powerscore,

I am confused why rule 1 website is shorter or equal to voicemail, whereas rule 3 and 4 does not allow equal to. Is it because of the "must be shorter"?

If rule 1 said website target must be shorter than its voicemail target then it would be same as rule 2 and 3? What in rule 1 indicates that there can be equal to? Is it the "can"?


Thanks!
Rule 1 allows equal to because the rule states that "none of the clients can have a website target that is longer than its voicemail target." Because it cannot be longer, it can be shorter or the same length. Rule 2 states stat that "Image's voicemail target must be shorter than the other clients' voicemail targets. Rule 3 states that "Solide's website target must be shorter than Truest's website target." Since rule 2 and 3 contain the language "must be shorter" equal to is not allowed.

Hope that helps.
 Claire Horan
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 408
  • Joined: Apr 18, 2016
|
#43684
Hi Lunsandy,

Rule 1 states that "None of the clients can have a website target that is longer than its voicemail target."

If W can't be longer than V, it can be either shorter than or equal to. Be careful to preserve all of the possibilities when diagramming rules.

Good question!
 ashnicng
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: Jul 05, 2019
|
#68028
Hello Powerscore,

Would you mind clarifying what characteristics of this game make it an advanced linear game? At first I thought it was a grouping game because there's no inherent order with the # of days, but I guess some rules (i.e. that Iv must be shorter than Sv and Tv) suggests some order? Thanks!
 James Finch
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 944
  • Joined: Sep 06, 2017
|
#68102
Hi ashnicnig,

Exactly, the initial setup doesn't imply any linear or ordering element to the game, but the rules do. This is a good example of the LSAT makers trying to trick test takers by hiding a key element to the setup in the rules. Always be mindful of this possibility and make sure to read both the setup and the rules before deciding on how to diagram, as there may be some of the setup in the rules or rules may be put in the setup. So the key to diagramming is the same as a linear game, where you end up with:

ClientV--ClientW

IV--SV and TV

SW--TW

And then we can make inferences from there.

Hope this helps!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.