Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Jul 1311:00 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Looking for your GMAT motivation to break through the score plateau? Pragati improved her score by massive 160 points with strategic guidance and hard-work! Find out how personalized mentorship and a strong mindset can turn GMAT struggles into success.
Jul 0901:00 PM EDT
-02:00 PM EDT
More Target Test Prep students are earning 100th percentile GMAT scores. Don’t settle for less when the Target Test Prep course gives you everything you need to score high on the GMAT. Start your 5-day free trial today.
Jul 1206:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Join our webinar to master GMAT RC Main Point Questions! Learn effective strategies to decipher passage themes and purposes. Senior Verbal Expert- Sunita Singhvi will equip you with tools to navigate complexities and avoid common traps set by the GMAT.
Jul 1508:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Jul 1611:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Jul 1911:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
38% (02:16) correct
62%
(02:43)
wrong
based on 3857
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
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.
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.
20 Jan 2019, 23:50
Kudos
Bookmarks
sebycb976
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.
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.
Proposal: 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
What this means:
Say, there are 3 prospective nominees for an office, X, Y and Z.
A prospective nominee, say X must be told that Y and Z are other NOMINEES (not other prospective nominees) and then X must consent. Only then X becomes a nominee.
Now think about it - if X is told that Y and Z are nominees, that means Y and Z have already consented to be nominees. This means both Y and Z were told about other nominees before consent. But hey, X wasn't a nominee at that time so they couldn't have been told about him.
So how does the first nominee give his consent? He cannot be told about the other nominees since they haven't given their consent yet.
So with multiple nominees, it is just not possible for anyone to become a nominee. If there is to be only one nominee, then it is ok. We tell him he is the only one, he consents and done!
Ques: Which of the following comments concerning the logic of the proposal is accurate?
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.
No. The proposal makes it impossible for the nominees to know who the other nominees are.
B. The proposal would widen the choice available to those choosing among the nominees.
The proposal makes having multiple nominees impossible. It surely wouldn't widen the choice.
C. If there are several prospective nominees, the proposal would deny the last nominee equal treatment with the first.
Several nominees are not possible. Last nominee and first nominee are irrelevant.
D. The proposal would enable a prospective nominee to withdraw from competition with a specific person without making that withdrawal known.
The proposal makes having multiple nominees impossible. If there are more than 1 prospective nominees, the proposal doesn't work. So no question of a second prospective nominee at all.
E. If there is more than one prospective nominee, the proposal would make it impossible for anyone to become a nominee.
Correct.
Answer (E)
16 Dec 2012, 01:37
Kudos
Bookmarks
sebycb976
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.
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.
