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

Redeem

Nominee Question.

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 116
Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 7:52 pm
Location: Bangalore, India
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:2 members

Nominee Question.

by Sanjay2706 » Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:54 pm
Hello People,

Any Explanation for this?
I am not able to get this.

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.

OA E
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1035
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:13 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Thanked: 474 times
Followed by:365 members

by VivianKerr » Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:36 am
Conclusion: Nominees must be told who the other nominees are & then give consent for nomination

Evidence: Nominees cannot be known until consent is given

Assumption: By telling the other nominees, this is not contradicting "knowing who the actual nominees are".

Question Rephrase: Which statement is best supported by the argument?

E is correct, since it highlights the apparent contradiction. The names of the nominees are supposed to be revealed to prospective nominees PRIOR to consent, and yet the names of the nominees cannot be given UNTIL consent is given.
Vivian Kerr
GMAT Rockstar, Tutor
https://www.GMATrockstar.com
https://www.yelp.com/biz/gmat-rockstar-los-angeles

Former Kaplan and Grockit instructor, freelance GMAT content creator, now offering affordable, effective, Skype-tutoring for the GMAT at $150/hr. Contact: [email protected]

Thank you for all the "thanks" and "follows"! :-)
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 6:46 am

by trangle.nh » Sun Jul 03, 2011 9:39 am
This is a very very difficult question to me.

My explanation as follows:

prospective nominees (PN)
Consent to Nomination (CN)
Told of other nominees (TOON)

Conditional reasoning ( LSAT): PP --> CN ---> TOON
Not TOON --> NOT CN ---> NOT PP

So if a person is not told of other nominees then he/she can not become PP

Then,
A is the first to be considered for nomination --> A can not be told of other PPs since A is the first to be considered (other PPs has not been determined) --> A can not become PP

Next: B, C, D --> same case with A

So E is OA

Sanjay2706 wrote:Hello People,

Any Explanation for this?
I am not able to get this.

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.

OA E
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1