I like it. The two day "cooling off" period makes sense. I've always felt that the most important thing is a gradient of sentancing. No need for a binary ruling of ban / don't ban. I'm very comfortable with the idea of verdict by the group and sentancing determined by the admins benevolent dictatorship. I have great faith in Dag's judgement. He has earned this by exercising even handed and reluctant authority.

As for drama, there should be every bit of this (if not more) as there is in real life (sorry Sarz).

I've always felt that the Siftquisition was a good idea, but it lacked finesse and flexibility and judiciousness in execution. This seems to be a good answer.

I say again: VS is very unique in it's approach to community. I still believe that we are setting precidence for how people relate on the web. Maybe we're just a video posting site, but I still think there's something larger being worked out here.

In the words of Milton Friedman, Capitalism requires a self dening nature of the highest degree when it comes to government regulation. The problem here isn't capitalism, the problem is businesses being on the bad side of government legislation and they can't aford to not be there while their competitors try and pass laws that do them harm while also trying to pass favorable legislation for themselves. The real key is that the governemnt doesn't over step its bounds into the free market arena. If government wasn't as huge in determining how businesses should and can be run; then compaines wouldn't need to do such things. As it is, because of the precident established by certain (IMO) flawed government intervention and regulatory policies, lobbiests are created.

In short, lobbiests are created by government interverntion into free market economy, not the other way around. 100 years ago when the government was more just about enforcing contracts and the law, lobbiests weren't a problem. When the government went intot the business of regulating business more comprehensivly, then lobbiests were created.

Still, the lobbiest problem is a problem. But I diagree that it is a creation from capitalism, it is a creation of flawed governmental regulation. What says the sift?

It amazes me how, even after this court case in Dover(http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html nice PBS documentary about it), ID people still try so hard to get this into schools. Now theres a legal precident against it and it, without a shadow of a doubt, shows that it is in no way scientific and these "gaps" in evolutionary "theory" are either not there or overstated for effect. Hell, it was proven that, word for word, the ID guys just replaced the word Creationism with ID throughout their books. Sloppily at that, leaving the wonderful phrase, "CIntelligent Designonists".

I guess they get credit for being persistent.. but slamming your head into a wall over and over doesn't get you through it..