Played with Kaylee. Sun came out, and I walked on my feet and heard with my ears. I ate the bits, the bits stayed down, and I work. I function like I'm a girl. I hate it because I know it'll go away. The sun goes dark and chaos has come again. Bits. Fluids. What am I?! - River, 'War Stories'

God, this quote. Wow.

I am a total River fanboy. I am more fascinated by her than anything else I can think of in the history of television. That I've seen. I think Twin Peaks might offer some contenders.

Did I mention that Objects in Space was my favorite ep? Yeah.

I am more fascinated by her than anything else I can think of in the history of television. That I've seen. I think Twin Peaks might offer some contenders.

In the movie, there's a cool scene where River talks about coffee and pie.

OK, I made that up.

And just off the top of my head, I can't think of a television character I've been more fascinated by either. Well, maybe by Spock, but that was when I was a kid....

I think Objects in Space is worth four!. Out of Gas ? I don't know. At least six!. Perhaps eight or ten, but I hate to be extravagant.

Well, whatever the maximum number of !, Out of Gas should have one more. Maybe Objects in Space too....

One ! is clearly acceptable.

If n !'s are acceptable, n+1 !'s are also acceptable.

Therefore, by induction, both OiS and OoG can acceptably have an infinite number of !'s.

Except OoG should be able to have ∞+1 !'s.

Except OoG should be able to have ∞+1 !'s.

I'm not sure the induction hypothesis allows for uncountable infinties. You'll need to prove that by a more rigorous method. I'm thinking a proof by contradiction is almost sure to be your best bet.

"Assume OoG can only have a countable number of !'s, reasonably..."

You can take it from there.

You need to use transfinite induction just to get the first conclusion that you can get a countably infinite number of !s. Otherwise, regular induction only tells you that any finite number of !s is acceptable.

For an uncountable number of !s, yes, contradiction might work.

Maybe some kind of triangulation argument.

This is a very Buffista discussion, I must say. All prompted by my casual comment about the necessary number of !s, and what is an extravagence. In short, not what was possible, but what was appropriate. What was in good taste. Where less is more. I say put on all the exclamation points you want, then look in the mirror and take one off.

We don't want !s with good taste, Hec. We want !s that taste good.