I am with the Wall Street Journal on this: Don't turn it into a cemetery.

Beyond that, I think it is vital that the new buildings make a statement as to human triumph over adversity and pride in our freedom, our prosperity, and capitalist society. In my opinion, if the building or buildings replacing the WTC are not AT LEAST as impressive as the originals, we're not doing something right.

A good thing to watch for: if a proposed design makes the environmentalists and anti-growth people fall on the floor, and start foaming at the mouth until the ambulances haul them away, then you're probably on the right track.

The anti-growth folks would love to see this acreage remain as a sterile, uninhabited park. Right in the financial district. Of course, they would also just as soon see the rest of Manhattan uninhabited too, but one thing at a time.

I'm looking for ideas already out there, and am looking for websites that are collecting them. I found an exhibit here, but wasn't impressed. Most of it is primarily crackpot artsy-fartsy stuff that has no relation to reality, business, or structural feasibility. It would help if someone filtered out the dumbass ideas, like this one:

This kind of thinking--or lack of it--is one reason why I gave up on architecture school.

We could do a lot worse than rebuilding them exactly as they were. I've always liked this idea too.