Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 20:13 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 20:13
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
655-705 Level|   Logical Flaw|         
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,355
Own Kudos:
778,087
 [10]
Given Kudos: 99,964
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,355
Kudos: 778,087
 [10]
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 27 Sep 2019, 04:14
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
9
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

62% (02:12) correct 38% (02:20) wrong based on 563 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Club rules say that only members in good standing may vote. You’ve admitted that club rules also say that all members whose dues are fully paid are members in good standing. And since, as the records indicate, Jeffrey has always paid his dues on time, clearly the president acted in violation of club rules.

Althea: By that reasoning my two-year-old niece can legally vote in next month’s national election since she is a citizen of this country, and only citizens can legally vote in national elections.

The reasoning in Thomas’ argument is flawed because his argument


(A) fails to take into account the distinction between something not being prohibited and its being authorized

(B) offers evidence that casts doubt on the character of the club president and thereby ignores the question of voting eligibility

(C) wrongly assumes that if a statement is not actually denied by someone, that statement must be regarded as true

(D) does not specify the issue with respect to which the disputed vote was cast

(E) overlooks the possibility that Althea is not an authority on the club’s rules
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
A
User avatar
daagh
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Last visit: 16 Oct 2020
Posts: 5,264
Own Kudos:
42,417
 [4]
Given Kudos: 422
Status: enjoying
Location: India
WE:Education (Education)
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 5,264
Kudos: 42,417
 [4]
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 27 Sep 2019, 14:11
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Generally, people with no subscription due are eligible to vote, which is a minimum pre-requisite. Normally there are barriers such as one's criminal record or NOCs before one is finally allowed to vote. A equates one's minimum qualification with final approval.
User avatar
Ps1810
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2022
Last visit: 27 Dec 2023
Posts: 87
Own Kudos:
62
Given Kudos: 17
Posts: 87
Kudos: 62
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 19 Aug 2023, 00:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Club rules say that only members in good standing may vote. You’ve admitted that club rules also say that all members whose dues are fully paid are members in good standing. And since, as the records indicate, Jeffrey has always paid his dues on time, clearly the president acted in violation of club rules.

Althea: By that reasoning my two-year-old niece can legally vote in next month’s national election since she is a citizen of this country, and only citizens can legally vote in national elections.

The reasoning in Thomas’ argument is flawed because his argument


(A) fails to take into account the distinction between something not being prohibited and its being authorized

(B) offers evidence that casts doubt on the character of the club president and thereby ignores the question of voting eligibility

(C) wrongly assumes that if a statement is not actually denied by someone, that statement must be regarded as true

(D) does not specify the issue with respect to which the disputed vote was cast

(E) overlooks the possibility that Althea is not an authority on the club’s rules
Show more

Hi, Can somebody please help me out here! I am unable to understand why and how is A correct? Many thanks!
User avatar
shivam7
User avatar
Joined: 19 Jun 2021
Last visit: 08 Dec 2023
Posts: 35
Own Kudos:
15
Given Kudos: 156
Posts: 35
Kudos: 15
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 19 Aug 2023, 15:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Ps1810
Bunuel
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Club rules say that only members in good standing may vote. You’ve admitted that club rules also say that all members whose dues are fully paid are members in good standing. And since, as the records indicate, Jeffrey has always paid his dues on time, clearly the president acted in violation of club rules.

Althea: By that reasoning my two-year-old niece can legally vote in next month’s national election since she is a citizen of this country, and only citizens can legally vote in national elections.

The reasoning in Thomas’ argument is flawed because his argument


(A) fails to take into account the distinction between something not being prohibited and its being authorized

(B) offers evidence that casts doubt on the character of the club president and thereby ignores the question of voting eligibility

(C) wrongly assumes that if a statement is not actually denied by someone, that statement must be regarded as true

(D) does not specify the issue with respect to which the disputed vote was cast

(E) overlooks the possibility that Althea is not an authority on the club’s rules

Hi, Can somebody please help me out here! I am unable to understand why and how is A correct? Many thanks!
Show more

Option A is correct because Thomas is confused about the rules, see if someone who has paid his fee on time is not prohibited to vote but is it the only condition? Nothing is mentioned about it. So being eligible to vote is not equal to actually being authorized to vote. And also the other options are not making any sense.
User avatar
Ps1810
User avatar
Joined: 15 Dec 2022
Last visit: 27 Dec 2023
Posts: 87
Own Kudos:
62
Given Kudos: 17
Posts: 87
Kudos: 62
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 19 Aug 2023, 21:14
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shivam7
Ps1810
Bunuel
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Club rules say that only members in good standing may vote. You’ve admitted that club rules also say that all members whose dues are fully paid are members in good standing. And since, as the records indicate, Jeffrey has always paid his dues on time, clearly the president acted in violation of club rules.

Althea: By that reasoning my two-year-old niece can legally vote in next month’s national election since she is a citizen of this country, and only citizens can legally vote in national elections.

The reasoning in Thomas’ argument is flawed because his argument


(A) fails to take into account the distinction between something not being prohibited and its being authorized

(B) offers evidence that casts doubt on the character of the club president and thereby ignores the question of voting eligibility

(C) wrongly assumes that if a statement is not actually denied by someone, that statement must be regarded as true

(D) does not specify the issue with respect to which the disputed vote was cast

(E) overlooks the possibility that Althea is not an authority on the club’s rules

Hi, Can somebody please help me out here! I am unable to understand why and how is A correct? Many thanks!

Option A is correct because Thomas is confused about the rules, see if someone who has paid his fee on time is not prohibited to vote but is it the only condition? Nothing is mentioned about it. So being eligible to vote is not equal to actually being authorized to vote. And also the other options are not making any sense.
Show more

Thank you so much! I have a much clear understanding now. I was confused bcz none on the options were making any sense and A was a bouncer for me. Anyway, Thanks again!
User avatar
thelastskybender
User avatar
Joined: 26 Dec 2022
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 132
Own Kudos:
75
Given Kudos: 50
Location: India
Schools: IIMA '25 (II) INSEAD Aug'24 intake
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
Schools: IIMA '25 (II) INSEAD Aug'24 intake
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
Posts: 132
Kudos: 75
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 21 Sep 2023, 04:33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This is a question based on understanding of necessary-sufficient conditions. To vote members should be in good standing: This is a necessary condition but it's not sufficient. What if there are other conditions as well?
User avatar
Abhishek009
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Last visit: 18 Jul 2025
Posts: 5,937
Own Kudos:
5,327
Given Kudos: 463
Status:QA & VA Forum Moderator
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
WE:Business Development (Commercial Banking)
Posts: 5,937
Kudos: 5,327
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 25 Sep 2023, 09:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Club rules say that only members in good standing may vote. You’ve admitted that club rules also say that all members whose dues are fully paid are members in good standing. And since, as the records indicate, Jeffrey has always paid his dues on time, clearly the president acted in violation of club rules.

Althea: By that reasoning my two-year-old niece can legally vote in next month’s national election since she is a citizen of this country, and only citizens can legally vote in national elections.

The reasoning in Thomas’ argument is flawed because his argument


(A) fails to take into account the distinction between something not being prohibited and its being authorized

(B) offers evidence that casts doubt on the character of the club president and thereby ignores the question of voting eligibility

(C) wrongly assumes that if a statement is not actually denied by someone, that statement must be regarded as true

(D) does not specify the issue with respect to which the disputed vote was cast

(E) overlooks the possibility that Althea is not an authority on the club’s rules
Show more
Thomas

    Members & Good Standing ------------>Vote
    Members Fully Paid Dues --------------> Good Standing
    Jeffry--------------->Timely cleared dues.

Althea

citizen ------------->Vote

This is Parallel to members who can caste vote....

This appears a question testing the concept of equivocation.....


Voting of a two year old is prohibited since she is incapable of taking part in national election process as mere being a citizen is not the only criteria, there will be other criteria such as age etc....

However, just fulfilling all the necessary conditions may not permit a person to vote (Eg : Lunatics), thus there is a distinctiong between authorized and Prohibitted, which is not considered in this case....

Answer must hence be (A), you can try negating other options U will certainly land in (A)
User avatar
unraveled
User avatar
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Last visit: 10 Apr 2025
Posts: 2,721
Own Kudos:
2,258
Given Kudos: 763
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy)
Posts: 2,721
Kudos: 2,258
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 26 Sep 2023, 09:19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Club rules say that only members in good standing may vote. You’ve admitted that club rules also say that all members whose dues are fully paid are members in good standing. And since, as the records indicate, Jeffrey has always paid his dues on time, clearly the president acted in violation of club rules.

Althea: By that reasoning my two-year-old niece can legally vote in next month’s national election since she is a citizen of this country, and only citizens can legally vote in national elections.

The reasoning in Thomas’ argument is flawed because his argument

(A) fails to take into account the distinction between something not being prohibited and its being authorized - CORRECT. Is it(good standing) the only way that someone's eligible to vote. If not than there might be another parameter for voting rights. And this is where the argument lacks a punch.

(B) offers evidence that casts doubt on the character of the club president and thereby ignores the question of voting eligibility - WRONG. Plain wrong. Scope irrelevant.

(C) wrongly assumes that if a statement is not actually denied by someone, that statement must be regarded as true - WRONG. Okay if it regarded so then what. Irrelevant at best.

(D) does not specify the issue with respect to which the disputed vote was cast - WRONG. What is done is done but after that some conclusion is made and why so. Scope shift.

(E) overlooks the possibility that Althea is not an authority on the club’s rules - WRONG. At first, Althea's role is altogether ambiguous here. Anyway, his/her authority is not impacting Thomas' conclusion. Why is it made in a way it is is the question?

Answer A.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,836
Own Kudos:
986
Posts: 18,836
Kudos: 986
Thomas: The club president had no right to disallow Jeffrey’s vote. Cl 26 Mar 2025, 09:35
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts