It is currently 23 Nov 2017, 11:55

### 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

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 234

Kudos [?]: 413 [1], given: 63

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

### Show Tags

14 Nov 2012, 22:29
1
KUDOS
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

43% (01:52) correct 57% (02:21) wrong based on 303 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.

could someone please explain this question. Thanks!
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 413 [1], given: 63

VP
Status: Final Lap Up!!!
Affiliations: NYK Line
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 1078

Kudos [?]: 663 [1], given: 70

Location: India
GMAT 1: 410 Q35 V11
GMAT 2: 530 Q44 V20
GMAT 3: 630 Q45 V31
GPA: 3.84
WE: Engineering (Transportation)
Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an org [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2012, 00:06
1
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Hi nelz

Wording of the argument is bit complicated but getting to the answer isn't that complicated.

I ll try to explain, if any doubt pls ask...

The argument states that

There is a proposal to amend the laws of an organization, and the drafted law is circulated among the employee.
What is the law?
When more than one nominee is to be named for an office, consent of prospective nominee must be taken and begore
his consent is sought, the nominee must be informed, who are the other nominees.

Now lets focus on the question:-
A condition is given in the question and we have to find the answer from options if the condition mentioned in the question is accurate.
Now what is that condition?

"if it cannot be known who the actual nominees are until prospective nominees have given their consent to be nominated"

"Which of the following comments concerning the logic of the proposal is accurate"
i.e. As per the law under consideration, the before taking the consent of the nominee he must be informed who are the other prospective nominees. So if we don't know who the actual nominees are, will we able to inform the nominee whose consent is to be taken that who are other nominees participating in the election.

Now you have to find an option to judge the accuracy of the statement explained above

Consider option E

E If there is more than one prospective nominee, the proposal would make it impossible for anyone to become a nominee.

Kudos [?]: 663 [1], given: 70

Joined: 19 Jul 2012
Posts: 169

Kudos [?]: 269 [2], given: 31

Location: India
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V28
GPA: 3.3
Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an org [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2012, 01:31
2
KUDOS
Argument provides below information:

Info1 : A proposal to amend the bylaws was circulated.

Info2 : If there are more than 1 nominee then 2 conditions are to be met:
a. Prospective nominees must consent for nomination
b. Before the consent need to be told the names of other nominees.

Question stem asks to pick the answer choice that meets the above demand and the condition provided:
Condition given is: Name of the actual nominees cannot be given until the prospective nominees give their consent.

The condition given above is in contrast to the condition given in the argument. But the condition given in the argument applies only in the case of more than 1 nominees. Thus, to meet the both the condition (given in the argument and in the question stem) there must be only 1 nominee.
E states this but in different words stating that if there are more than 1 nominee then the proposal is impossible to work.

Kudos [?]: 269 [2], given: 31

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 234

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 63

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

### Show Tags

15 Nov 2012, 01:38
Thanks for the explanations. You got to read whats going on very carefully.

Kudos [?]: 413 [0], given: 63

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10132

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2014, 06:24
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.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Current Student
Joined: 25 Sep 2012
Posts: 283

Kudos [?]: 177 [0], given: 242

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GMAT 2: 680 Q48 V34
Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2014, 06:26
Can question like these appear in GMAT?
The argument and the answer both, are constructed in a complex manner.
Also, I didn't understand which question type it is? Is it reslove the paradox?

Kudos [?]: 177 [0], given: 242

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10132

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2015, 02:16
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.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 06 Nov 2014
Posts: 1905

Kudos [?]: 542 [0], given: 23

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

### Show Tags

01 Jul 2015, 04:39
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.

According to the stimulus, the suggested procedural order is awareness of other nominees=>nominee gives consent. But the current rule reverses this: nominee gives consent => awareness of other nominees.

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.
The proposal wouldn't make it possible for the nominees to be aware of the others because they would have needed to know who the other nominees were prior to becoming nominees themselves.
B The proposal would widen the choice available to those choosing among the nominees.
The proposal doesn't affect the choice of nominees.
C If there are several prospective nominees, the proposal would deny the last nominee equal treatment with the first.
equal treatment is out of scope
D The proposal would enable a prospective nominee to withdraw from competition with a specific person without making that withdrawal known. withdrawal is out of scope

E If there is more than one prospective nominee, the proposal would make it impossible for anyone to become a nominee. With more than one nominee it would be impossible, since to give consent one needs to know the other nominees but to know the other nominees one needs to give consent.

Kudos [?]: 542 [0], given: 23

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10132

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2016, 06:42
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.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Re: The following proposal to amend the bylaws of an   [#permalink] 23 Sep 2016, 06:42
Display posts from previous: Sort by