BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions
Start free 5-day trial
Read 559 reviewsTarget Test Prep

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

1000 CR test3

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 484
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 7:01 pmFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 2 times
by magical cook » Fri Mar 30, 2007 3:02 pm
Hi,

I am confused with this logical statement - the correct answer is E) but could anyone explain this logic??


The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an organization was circulated to its members for comment.
When more than one nominee is to be named for an office, prospective nominees must consent to nomination and before giving such consent must be told who the other nominees will be.


Which of the following comments concerning the logic of the proposal is accurate if it cannot be known who the actual nominees are until prospective nominees have given their consent to be nominated?
(A) The proposal would make it possible for each of several nominees for an office to be aware of who all of the other nominees are.
(B) The proposal would widen the choice available to those choosing among the nominees.
(C) If there are several prospective nominees, the proposal would deny the last nominee equal treatment with the first.
(D) The proposal would enable a prospective nominee to withdraw from competition with a specific person without making that withdrawal known.
(E) If there is more than one prospective nominee, the proposal would make it impossible for anyone to become a nominee.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:21 pm
Thanked: 2 times

by rajesh_ctm » Tue Apr 03, 2007 6:56 pm
prospective nominees must consent to nomination and before giving such consent must be told who the other nominees will be.

This is circular logic! Each one wants to know who the others are, before giving consent. Where do you start? How do you know who is a nominee? If there is a nominee existing, he must have been told that you are a nominee too otherwise his condition is not met, but you are not yet a nominee!

I am not sure how to explain it in words, sorry!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 484
Joined: Sun Jul 30, 2006 7:01 pmFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 2 times

by magical cook » Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:37 pm
Thanks for trying - it seems my reading skill is not enough :cry: to understand this question....(I read over and over but still can't seem to get the logic...)
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 103
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 7:10 pm
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Thanked: 2 times

by jrbrown2 » Sun Jul 01, 2007 1:23 pm
I originally thought that the question was asking what would happen if a situation was changed. I guess that's not the case.

The statement says that each nominee must be told who the other nominees are b4 giving their consent for nomination. (i.e. The nominees have to know who they're up against before deciding whether to compete)

The ques. then asks what if the nominees aren't told who they're up against until they give their consent.

If they're not told who they're up against, then, as per the proposal, the nominees don't give their consent. So nothing happens. It would be impossible for anyone to become a nominee. A Catch-22. Hence E
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 3:07 am

by micheal_kr » Tue May 03, 2016 4:48 am
E should be the answer
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1