John Mitchell makes some assertions in his post about this discussion (my previous post on this is here). The assertion?

However, Elliot is completely right that having 78 methods in any class is an atrocity. Something that has that much surface area is way too complicated for humans to keep manageable. In addition, it also sets a bad example for coders learning the recommended ways of doing things -- i.e., "just throw anything you feel like in there."

I like the way he baldly asserts that 78 methods is "an atrocity". So what's the magic number? Is 22 methods ok, but 23 - heck no, that gets into atrocity range? There's absolutely no way to look at the raw number of methods and make that statement. He's assuming that there must be fluff in there - but that's an assumption, not evidence. The rest of his post is actually quite reasonable - it's just that one thing I object to.