I agree that the first thing I would have done to correct the query would be to make it work by adding the obviously missing GROUP BY clause. AFTER that, if I could not correctly determine that last scenario was the proper answer it would be a simple matter to populate a few tables and run the query.

Owing to the fact that query would not even run, I think that the set of possible answers did not match the situation. Imagine if a fourth alternative "Add GROUP BY" had been presented. By itself it would not have produced the stipulated results but at the very least it would have turned it into a runnable query. How many would have selected the fourth answer ?

I have seen a few more questions of this ilk. For instance where the official solution was to change a table definition, which in real-life would mean that it was likely to break existing code.

When such errors are pointed out, the points awarded for the question of the day should be clawed back.