If I would be you, OP, I'd delete some parts of your comment, lol! Yet, I think there are several issues with the testing process itself:

1. The time allocated to complete a part of an exam: imo, 3 hrs for REG and 4 hrs - for FAR are not near enough for the huge amount of information tested. The sims should be shorter: 1 or 2 tabs plus a WC part. I'm still talking about the 2010 year exam format.

2. The wording on most MCQs is quite tricky; it seems that 'they' play some sort of "Gotcha" game with candidates. Accordingly, a lot of time is spent on MCQs instead of sims.

3. I think you'd have a valid point (complaining about the grading/curving process) only if sims would have been more basic and if the amount of information tested would correlate with that 4hr time constraint. I think there is a discrepancy between what is tested and what is needed to protect the public... Like, let's set the bar extremely high, and then, when people just can't do it the intended way and within the time limit, let's review and adjust the results accordingly. The testing itself went into some stratospheric dimentions in terms of difficulty. I hope things will change for the better in 2011.

4. I don't beat myself for getting a passing score, 'cause I was stronger on MCQs too. I worked all those questions to get to the right answer; I'm pretty sure that I got  sims right (the parts that I was able to finish, aka only 1st sim).  It means that I know the required minimum to protect the public; I just ran out of time. Would you imply that those situations (from the sims) do accurately portray what you see in your day-to-day activity as an accountant? I doubt that. At least, in real life you have more time than those 7-9 minutes to complete a tab from a sim.

ps. When I've got my 74, I felt like I should've passed this exam the first time around. It's all about the time management!!! At least, I'm not a fast test taker: this worked against me both in REG and FAR.