Question on Pg 166 on LG strategy guide

[LSAT-Chang]

Hello MLSAT strategy guide writers!
I had a quick question about one of your explanations on the LG page.. I wasn't sure if it was just a minor mistake on your part or that I wasn't understanding it clearly.

On pg. 166, the last sentence reads "The next rule we can use is...so let's swing over to the other side of the diagram, where we see that G out requires W out. This eliminates (E), leaving us with (D)." I don't think this explanation is correct, since the question asks us about the complete and accurate list of the violinists "selected" so who are basically "IN", so how does G OUT requiring W OUT eliminate (E)?

In the "logic chain" diagram, we see that we can't infer anything based on Greene being IN, since the chain ends there. But neither can we infer anything about Greene being IN by looking at Greene being OUT. Does this make sense?

The reason I eliminated (E) was because you MUST have either H or U (or both) since both can't be OUT, so since (E) doesn't have any of the two, it is wrong. But I want to make sure that I'm not missing out on anything based on the reason why you eliminated (E).

[timmydoeslsat]

You are correct, answer choice E does not violate the last constraint of (W--->G).

The reason you used to eliminate choice E is correct. At least one of H and U must be present, and choice E does not have that.

Great job!