Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 29 Mar 2017, 06:38

# Admission Decisions:

INSEAD (Join Chat 7) | Stanford GSB (Join Chat 6) | Your MBA Journey & Illinois MBA: Free Webinar Today

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 197
Location: Bangkok
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 0

Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 08:26
13
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

67% (02:37) correct 33% (01:33) wrong based on 1064 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Q21:
Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council’s equipment-storage building collapsed under the weight of last week’s heavy snowfall. The building was constructed recently and met local building-safety codes in every particular, except that the nails used for attaching roof supports to the building’s columns were of a smaller size than the codes specify for this purpose. Clearly, this collapse exemplifies how even a single, apparently insignificant, departure from safety standards can have severe consequences.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the editorial’s argument?

A. The only other buildings whose roofs collapsed from the weight of the snowfall were older buildings constructed according to less exacting standards than those in the safety codes.
B. Because of the particular location of the equipment-storage building, the weight of snow on its roof was greater than the maximum weight allowed for in the safety codes.
C. Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office building did not apply to it.
D. The columns of the building were no stronger than the building-safety codes required for such a building.
E. Because the equipment-storage building was where the council kept snow-removal equipment, the building was almost completely empty when the roof collapsed.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

cool

If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
Director
Joined: 08 Feb 2007
Posts: 610
Location: New Haven, CT
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 09:10
A, because you want to show a comparison with the building collapse and other building collapses to make the argument hold true.
Manager
Joined: 24 Jun 2006
Posts: 130
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 09:20
Clear A
VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1471
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 189 [0], given: 13

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 11:48
Clear A..
Director
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 924
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 76 [0], given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 11:54
Straight A.

-Brajesh
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 471
Location: united states
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 12:05
jet1445 wrote:
Q21:
Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council’s equipment-storage building collapsed under the weight of last week’s heavy snowfall. The building was constructed recently and met local building-safety codes in every particular, except that the nails used for attaching roof supports to the building’s columns were of a smaller size than the codes specify for this purpose. Clearly, this collapse exemplifies how even a single, apparently insignificant, departure from safety standards can have severe consequences.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the editorial’s argument?

A. The only other buildings whose roofs collapsed from the weight of the snowfall were older buildings constructed according to less exacting standards than those in the safety codes.
B. Because of the particular location of the equipment-storage building, the weight of snow on its roof was greater than the maximum weight allowed for in the safety codes.
C. Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office building did not apply to it.
D. The columns of the building were no stronger than the building-safety codes required for such a building.
E. Because the equipment-storage building was where the council kept snow-removal equipment, the building was almost completely empty when the roof collapsed.

I think D.

in A, there are endless possibilities of violation of standards. Also, A talks about older buildings. Hence normal wear and tear could also be involved.

D tells us that the columns adhered to the safety code. So, it's the nail that caused the damage.
_________________

for every person who doesn't try because he is
afraid of loosing , there is another person who
keeps making mistakes and succeeds..

VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1471
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 189 [0], given: 13

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 12:10
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
shoonya wrote:
jet1445 wrote:
Q21:
Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council’s equipment-storage building collapsed under the weight of last week’s heavy snowfall. The building was constructed recently and met local building-safety codes in every particular, except that the nails used for attaching roof supports to the building’s columns were of a smaller size than the codes specify for this purpose. Clearly, this collapse exemplifies how even a single, apparently insignificant, departure from safety standards can have severe consequences.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the editorial’s argument?

A. The only other buildings whose roofs collapsed from the weight of the snowfall were older buildings constructed according to less exacting standards than those in the safety codes.
B. Because of the particular location of the equipment-storage building, the weight of snow on its roof was greater than the maximum weight allowed for in the safety codes.
C. Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office building did not apply to it.
D. The columns of the building were no stronger than the building-safety codes required for such a building.
E. Because the equipment-storage building was where the council kept snow-removal equipment, the building was almost completely empty when the roof collapsed.

I think D.

in A, there are endless possibilities of violation of standards. Also, A talks about older buildings. Hence normal wear and tear could also be involved.

D tells us that the columns adhered to the safety code. So, it's the nail that caused the damage.

Welll - it will be D if you want to prove (which incidentally has already been shown to be true in the passage) that the building collapsed due to the nail being non-standard.

The point the author is trying to make is that even miniscule violations from prescribed standards can lead to damages as indicated. A buttresses this fact by illustrating more such cases where lack of compliance has caused buildings to be damaged.
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 471
Location: united states
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 12:17
dwivedys wrote:
shoonya wrote:
jet1445 wrote:
Q21:
Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council’s equipment-storage building collapsed under the weight of last week’s heavy snowfall. The building was constructed recently and met local building-safety codes in every particular, except that the nails used for attaching roof supports to the building’s columns were of a smaller size than the codes specify for this purpose. Clearly, this collapse exemplifies how even a single, apparently insignificant, departure from safety standards can have severe consequences.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the editorial’s argument?

wA. The only other buildings whose roofs collapsed from the weight of the snowfall were older buildings constructed according to less exacting standards than those in the safety codes.
B. Because of the particular location of the equipment-storage building, the weight of snow on its roof was greater than the maximum weight allowed for in the safety codes.
C. Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office building did not apply to it.
D. The columns of the building were no stronger than the building-safety codes required for such a building.
E. Because the equipment-storage building was where the council kept snow-removal equipment, the building was almost completely empty when the roof collapsed.

I think D.

in A, there are endless possibilities of violation of standards. Also, A talks about older buildings. Hence normal wear and tear could also be involved.

D tells us that the columns adhered to the safety code. So, it's the nail that caused the damage.

Welll - it will be D if you want to prove (which incidentally has already been shown to be true in the passage) that the building collapsed due to the nail being non-standard.

The point the author is trying to make is that even miniscule violations from prescribed standards can lead to damages as indicated. A buttresses this fact by illustrating more such cases where lack of compliance has caused buildings to be damaged.

I see your point. But A talks about older buildings. How would you know that the problems with those buildings were insignificant? Author's editorial doesn't talk about any other problem with the building. D gives enough reasons to believe that it's the nails and nothing else that caused the damage. It supports the argument.
_________________

for every person who doesn't try because he is
afraid of loosing , there is another person who
keeps making mistakes and succeeds..

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
Posts: 471
Location: united states
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 12:17
Jet, what's the OA?
_________________

for every person who doesn't try because he is
afraid of loosing , there is another person who
keeps making mistakes and succeeds..

VP
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1471
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 189 [0], given: 13

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jul 2007, 12:28
Quote:
How would you know that the problems with those buildings were insignificant?

It's not the degree of problems that's important - what's notable is the fact that all the buildings which violated code (regardless of the degree of non-compliance) were damaged.
Director
Joined: 29 Jul 2006
Posts: 871
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jul 2007, 10:59
Hi shoonya,read D carefully.
D says: The columns of the building were no stronger than the building-safety codes required for such a building.

no stronger=as strong as or less stronger than

In that case,the argument can be weakened as well.
So,D is incorrect.
A is the answer.
Manager
Joined: 11 Jan 2007
Posts: 197
Location: Bangkok
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2007, 04:45
OA is A
_________________

cool

Intern
Joined: 18 Feb 2014
Posts: 30
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 22

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2014, 03:08
Because of the particular location of the equipment-storage building, the weight of snow on
its roof was greater than the maximum weight allowed for in the safety codes.

Option B gives one example saying how another minor isssue can prove big later. Why not B
option A doesnt tell the significance. See, the conclusion of this arg. is that MINOR things ignored come out to be big.
@dwivedys :Can you tell what pre thinking you did for this?
Intern
Joined: 18 Feb 2014
Posts: 30
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 22

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2014, 03:08
Because of the particular location of the equipment-storage building, the weight of snow on
its roof was greater than the maximum weight allowed for in the safety codes.

Option B gives one example saying how another minor isssue can prove big later. Why not B
option A doesnt tell the significance. See, the conclusion of this arg. is that MINOR things ignored come out to be big.
@dwivedys :Can you tell what pre thinking you did for this?
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10672
Followers: 959

Kudos [?]: 214 [1] , given: 0

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jun 2015, 02:48
1
This post received
KUDOS
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.
Intern
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
Posts: 12
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 45

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2016, 15:21
Hi there,

I don't understand why answer choice B is wrong and why this was qualified as a weaken questions? I think it should be a strengthen question. Can someone please clarify?
Intern
Joined: 27 Jan 2016
Posts: 3
Followers: 0

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

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2016, 22:15
Answer D) states that:

The columns of the building were no stronger than the building-safety codes required for such a building.

Hence, this supports the conclusion the most, because even the smallest error can result in a building that is now not meeting safety standards and will therefore collapse.

Answer A) talks about old buildings, which could have a multitude of reasons why they dont meet the most recent safety standards.

Out of these two answers, D) more strongly supports the argument that even small departures from safety standards can have disastrous consequences.
Intern
Joined: 07 Mar 2011
Posts: 30
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 5

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Feb 2016, 23:43
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
rlitagmatstudy wrote:
Hi there,

I don't understand why answer choice B is wrong and why this was qualified as a weaken questions? I think it should be a strengthen question. Can someone please clarify?

I see your point, OG 2016 section 8.4 Practice Questions, 4th question corresponds to this question Q21. This question suppose to be a weaken question according to OG-2016, the official answer when it is weaken type is "B",

But as per Q21 the corresponding answer choice when it is "STRENGTHEN" type is "A".

Both strengthen and weaken can be identified in a single question and both are correct. We got one bonus question .
Intern
Joined: 29 Apr 2013
Posts: 11
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 5

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Mar 2016, 09:12
jet1445 wrote:
Q21:
Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council’s equipment-storage building collapsed under the weight of last week’s heavy snowfall. The building was constructed recently and met local building-safety codes in every particular, except that the nails used for attaching roof supports to the building’s columns were of a smaller size than the codes specify for this purpose. Clearly, this collapse exemplifies how even a single, apparently insignificant, departure from safety standards can have severe consequences.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the editorial’s argument?

A. The only other buildings whose roofs collapsed from the weight of the snowfall were older buildings constructed according to less exacting standards than those in the safety codes.
B. Because of the particular location of the equipment-storage building, the weight of snow on its roof was greater than the maximum weight allowed for in the safety codes.
C. Because the equipment-storage building was not intended for human occupation, some safety-code provisions that would have applied to an office building did not apply to it.
D. The columns of the building were no stronger than the building-safety codes required for such a building.
E. Because the equipment-storage building was where the council kept snow-removal equipment, the building was almost completely empty when the roof collapsed.

Answer is A.
It is already mentioned in the Argument that building has met its safety standard except for nails. So option B and D are crossed ( no use in considering point for other deatils as building has met its safety standards except for nails ) . C and E are Out of scope. Going straight with option A as it gives another example and supports the Conclusion.

Please let me know know if I am correct with my reasoning.
Intern
Joined: 21 May 2015
Posts: 7
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 168

Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Apr 2016, 01:35
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
It's either between A or D.

See the Argument and see the objective. But Option D says that it happened because of weak columns. This means the collapse is not due to nails but due to columns. So this provides an alternate idea to explain why building roof collpased.

Clearly weakens the argument, not strengthen it.

See D is giving alternate explanation for the same building we are concerned about. It would have been correct if the explanations of the weak columns were pointed to some other building. This is being shown in option A.
Re: Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s   [#permalink] 05 Apr 2016, 01:35

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 23 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Editorial: The roof of Northtown's municipal equipment-storage buildin 1 28 Jan 2016, 07:57
2 Editorial in Golbindian Newspaper 3 30 Jun 2015, 11:48
2 The roof of Northtown's municipal equipment-storage 5 16 Jun 2015, 18:18
26 Editorial in Krenlandian Newspaper: Krenland s steelmakers 34 09 Jan 2008, 19:08
2 Q21: In Teruvia, the quantity of rice produced per year is 9 07 Jun 2007, 08:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Q21: Editorial: The roof of Northtown Council s

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 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®.