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

 It is currently 26 Mar 2017, 14:05

### 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

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

# The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an

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

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 964
Location: Florida
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 133 [0], given: 0

The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2004, 17:31
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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 think this is easy ..enjoy!!
If you have any questions
you can ask an expert
New!
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Dec 2003
Posts: 4302
Followers: 42

Kudos [?]: 450 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2004, 18:37
E seems best indeed. It sounds like one of those problems where one cannot get an approval before getting the other party's approval.
_________________

Best Regards,

Paul

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 393
Location: Bangalore, India
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR - prospective nominees [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2004, 23:33
Hi All,

I think I got clarity on this query.

The wording can be improved in this query.

Say the stem is given like this

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-at the time of the nomination- will be.

The answer will be ovious D. Because when the first guy is about to consent to nomination, at the time of his nomination, he can be intimated very clearly that there are no other nominees. Then, he consents to his nomination. The second guy knows at the time of his nomination that the first guy is nominated and the second guy may withdraw if he prefers to avoid competition with the other guy ie., the first guy. Thus, D is a perfect choice and all others are ruled out for obvious reasons.

Let us say..the stem is as follows.

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-at the [color=blue]closing time of the nomination[/color]- will be (i.e., who the final nominees are).

Now, even when the first guy wants to consent, he has to know the names of all the other nominees-which is not possible because all the other nominees will be known only when they give consent. Thus, this is forming a vicious circle and thus E is obvious choice.

Thus, the answer can be either D or E depending on the missing link (colored above). Do correct me if I donot make sense

*********************
(Following is my answer before adding the above piece)
*********************

I am getting it as D.

As per the rules, a prospective nominee looks at the nominees who have given their consent and withdraws because he wants to avoid competition with one nominee.

Somehow, the condition given (if it cannot be known who the actual nominees are until prospective nominees have given their consent ) is in line with argument and is not constraining the logic in anyway.

dj 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 think this is easy ..enjoy!!

_________________

Awaiting response,

Thnx & Rgds,
Chandra

Last edited by mallelac on 13 Oct 2004, 06:47, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 42
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

12 Oct 2004, 14:52
E, because of the fact that the list is not known which is a prerequisite in the stimulus.
Intern
Joined: 21 Aug 2004
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2004, 00:26
i was confused betw C/E

i will choose E

but if the argument says,

"....prospective nominees must consent to nomination and before giving such consent must be told who the other nominees are."
rather than
"............who the other nominees will be."

than i think than the best ans would have been C
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Dec 2003
Posts: 366
Location: India
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2004, 02:21
there are three things happening one by one
(1) - Nominee-A will give another nominee's name (Nominee B's name)
( Moninee - A is not aware of who all have participated yet so nominee - A can propose the name (i.e. - B), which is already present in the list. )
well, (2) - moninee will give its consent to its own participation
(3) - Nominee - A will be given a list who all have participated.

So IMHO, the answer can be "D" only
B is quite near but wrong because one proposing the other as next nominee can be circular.

Dharmin
_________________

Perseverance, Hard Work and self confidence

Director
Joined: 16 Jun 2004
Posts: 892
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2004, 05:14
No other choices other than D and E popped out as shortlist.

I am with E here. There are two proposals - One to tell the other nominees name. Secod proposal is not to tell the other nominee name until consent for nomination by the person asked for nomination.

The first proposal is mentioned to ensure that the number of nominees is by default filtered by announcing prior who the current nominee is. So easy final pick. The second proposal denies this filter. So, E.
Director
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 964
Location: Florida
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 133 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2004, 06:49
right on. It is E indeed.

it is like a deadlock; one can't move without other's consent.
you go first...you go first...you go first...you go first... and the argument continues
13 Oct 2004, 06:49
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an 8 15 Aug 2008, 04:51
14 The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an 14 04 Jun 2008, 20:10
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an 5 23 Dec 2007, 08:59
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an 3 12 Jul 2007, 11:41
The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an 2 16 Jun 2007, 05:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an

 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®.