4 responses to ““low Mach””

• 

  Sarah April 20th, 2006 at 12:07

  53 – No Mach for me

• 

  M. Mathe April 20th, 2006 at 21:39

  I scored a 67 which, as you guessed it, is a high Mach. What “is,” is that “high machs” hold eachother to similair standards and “low machs” hold eachother to similiar standards. Thus, “high machs” will not lie to eachother because they are expecting it from the other and know that the other will be able to tell. They are unable to play “game” on the other, so to speak, so they remain in a state of distrust and self-sufficiency, which, to a “high mach” is only what they deserve, love and need.

  — This commentor has no comment on (nor ability to comment upon) “low machs” as I REFUSE to speculate.

• 

  Jordan April 21st, 2006 at 14:37

  I took it again today to get a more statistically significant result and got a 54 this time. I guess that puts my average at 56.

• 

  Graham April 21st, 2006 at 16:28

  I’m at a 54. I don’t know about science that’s stacked with emotional bias. Maybe that’s why I think the social sciences are kind of a joke. At least I know why 2 pac is always talking about machieavelli now. You know he was a college boy? So was ludacris, kanye west, the list goes on. It’s funny that those guys rap about social mobility through drug dealing and the music industry when they started in the middle…