Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 24 Jul 2014, 12:03

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 0

The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an [#permalink] New post 04 Jun 2008, 19:10
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

64% (03:09) correct 36% (01:57) wrong based on 68 sessions
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.
2 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 27 Feb 2012
Posts: 138
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [2] , given: 22

Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an [#permalink] New post 16 Dec 2012, 00:37
2
This post received
KUDOS
sebycb976 wrote:
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.




A deadlock situation, where one cannot move without the consent of another.

Suppose X and Y are nominees.
X must know who is Y before giving consent.
Similarly Y must know who is X before giving such consent.


Thus no one can give consent because no one knows who is the other nominee.
_________________

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2011
Posts: 185
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 54 [1] , given: 103

Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an [#permalink] New post 07 Dec 2012, 05:02
1
This post received
KUDOS
One good question...

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.
Before nomination must know the other candidates

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?
this means a candidate will first give its consent to be nominated , then they are known to others

From above two are contradicting one is telling that they will know others then they will file nomination,
other one tells that first they will file and then will 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.
not possible as we have an contradictory situation above

B. The proposal would widen the choice available to those choosing among the nominees.
not possible as we have an contradictory situation above

C. If there are several prospective nominees, the proposal would deny the last nominee equal treatment with the first.
out of context

D. The proposal would enable a prospective nominee to withdraw from competition with a specific person without making that withdrawal known.
out of context

E. If there is more than one prospective nominee, the proposal would make it impossible for anyone to become a nominee.
Correct: there can be only one nominee
_________________

If u can't jump the 700 wall , drill a big hole and cross it .. I can and I WILL DO IT ...need some encouragement and inspirations from U ALL

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Jun 2008
Posts: 90
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Nominees [#permalink] New post 04 Jun 2008, 19:28
I go with E
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1942
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 249 [0], given: 1

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: CR - Nominees [#permalink] New post 04 Jun 2008, 19:40
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Nominees [#permalink] New post 04 Jun 2008, 19:48
Please explain your choices
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 418
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR - Nominees [#permalink] New post 04 Jun 2008, 20:10
sebycb976 wrote:
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.


I choose E because if there is more than one prospective nominee, no one will become nominee. It means if we have prospective official candidate, why we need other candidates!!!

For instance, Barrack Obama is prospective official Democratic president candidate. No one, including Hillary, will become official candidate.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Nominees [#permalink] New post 04 Jun 2008, 20:24
Can you go into a bit more detail on your reasoning? The OA is indeed E, I just don't understand how there cant be another candidate if the first is just a prospective nominee.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 14 Mar 2007
Posts: 319
Location: Hungary
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 3

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR - Nominees [#permalink] New post 05 Jun 2008, 03:18
This question is tough. I also cannot understand it.
CEO
CEO
User avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2007
Posts: 2593
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 180 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR - Nominees [#permalink] New post 05 Jun 2008, 06:30
sebycb976 wrote:
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.



Took me 3 min. but I arrived at E. I was initially going to choose D, but decided to reread the question 1 more time.

Basically you need to know the names b/f you consent, but you can't know the names unless they have given their consent.

So only 1 person can actually go.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 883
Concentration: General Management, General Management
Schools: IIM A '15
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 160 [0], given: 299

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an [#permalink] New post 11 Dec 2012, 20:14
Can the GMAT Experts/Instructors explain the OA as many of us are not able to get it correct , moreover OA needs justification
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2012
Posts: 5
Schools: AGSM '15
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an [#permalink] New post 15 Dec 2012, 20:59
sebycb976 wrote:
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.



I'll go with E.

The bylaws states in a nutshell: if you want to be named for office, you must be told who you are running against before you give your consent. This only applies to MORE THAN ONE nominee.

The question basically says "You must give your consent first before you know who you are running against." and asks you to find the logical issue with the two statements.

A) Is a direct result of applying the bylaws. There is no issue here.

B) irrelevant

C) Nothing in the paragraph mentions preferential treaetment.

D) irrelevant

E) Correct answer. For one person, the bylaw does not apply. For more than 1 person, both statements apply and there is a logical issue. The issue comes from the fact that both statements cannot apply at once. It is one or the other.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 1413
Followers: 203

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an [#permalink] New post 19 Jun 2014, 07:20
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an   [#permalink] 19 Jun 2014, 07:20
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an rahulraao 3 14 Sep 2005, 16:47
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an okdongdong 8 11 Jul 2005, 05:42
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an ruhi 4 21 Nov 2004, 10:22
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an mohitguptask 1 30 Oct 2004, 15:40
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an dj 7 11 Oct 2004, 16:31
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.