Yeah, Sheridan is great; you’re not the only one who misses him :). As for Forsythe’s goals, remember that definitions of “noninteractive” can vary. By the metrics Wizards has laid out, I think decks that attack with creatures are generally considered kosher—that would include Infect, Affinity, Death’s Shadow, and even Dredge. Certainly Infect and Dredge are playing with fire regarding the turn four rule though.

I was just reading his article about Splinter Twin from back in January. He was dead on w/what he expected to have happen to Modern w/all the linear decks, but Affinity has fallen off from his expectation and he had expected it to correct itself by the end of the summer. Was interesting looking back at predictions to compare.

Also, based on an Aaron Foresythe article from April ( http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/ptsoi/where-modern-goes-from-here-2016-04-24 ), it appears that 1 and 3 are certainly fitting. 2 seems like it is completely shot and 4 is likely incorrect. There are probably cards that can be unbanned and likely a few cards that will be banned. I fully expect both bans and unbans to be announced in January and Modern will be drastically different in its wake.

“Beyond those, Modern should:

1) Have a diverse top-tier metagame featuring over a dozen archetypes

2) Not be dominated by fast, non-interactive decks (consistent kills before turn four are a red flag)

3) Be at a power level that allows some newly printed Standard cards to affect the format (we don’t have other ways to introduce cards into the format, and we like it when cards or decks can transition)

4) Have as small a banned list as possible that accomplishes all the previous goals”

Right now he’s pretty busy with a new job. I’m still in contact with him and he has an article or two planned, but the timing is up in the air.