@SoundlessEcho Thank you for the suggestion. 
For any additions of content-related suggestions, we do ask for an accompanying (preferably primary) MCAT-specific source to streamline deck maintenance.
Please see the video linked
Ah, I didn’t realize you were using that resource as a reference. That works.
A small detail: when we can, as much as possible, it’s slightly preferable to link to Khan Academy at their website, rather than Youtube, for a few reasons. It’s not a huge deal, and either can work but inasmuch as is possible, it’s a bit preferable just as a general practice if you have the spare moment when making suggestions.
@Brian_BH this is definitely a big improvement but is it kind of a circular definition?
For example, our card on completeness is:
Rational Choice Theory:
Describe Completeness:
{{c1::Every action can be ranked}}
Like should we be defining transitivity how completeness is? Or no because there’s no non awkward way to do it:
Example idea:
In rational choice theory, transitivity is the assumption that if a person ranks A over B and B over C, they must also rank A over C.
The original card is indefensible, God.
I’ve honestly never seen a wording for this that doesn’t read like a robot trying not to short-circuit
I’m not opposed to your phrasing, though we should probably put it in as a new suggestion. Otherwise it’s too easy to vote on a suggestion, edit it, lose track of who voted on what version, when, etc. Especially given that this one is now a month old
In that case we can just revert the Text portion of the suggestion, approve the Extra field, then put in a separate suggestion as a new one just for diligence:
Great! reverted the text portion. I’m also not convinced the current shorthand representation is correct. I think it’s actually presented like if A > B and B > C then A > C to purposely separate them as individual ranking pairs instead of the current A>B>C then A > C. If you agree, I think it would then actually make sense to replace “2. Transitivity (ranks have transitive property)” in the extra section with the shorthand above it 2. Transitivity ( if A > B and B > C then A > C)
If so, will make edits then submit suggestion with new sentence once this one goes!
I’m not opposed to the idea, but sort of same thing above: if we keep going through multiple rounds of editing an existing suggestion then it’s probably best practice to put in a new suggestion.
Otherwise a suggestion gets voted on, then we change it, then we go back and forth and re-vote on multiple rounds of an existing idea and lose track of what’s what
Totally makes sense will do both in new suggestion.