The reviewers agree that this is an exciting and interesting paper which improves the best-known variance-dependent rates for statistical learning with nonparametric classes, and are all in favor of accepting. I hope the authors will pay attention to the typos and clarifications pointed about by the reviewers and address these in the final version of the paper. As reviewer 4 and the authors' response mention, the point about removing the \log(n) factor about VC classes is subtle, and this paper does not really remove this term unless we make specific assumptions on the value of V*. I would recommend the authors either expand the discussion about this and include a more detailed comparison with prior work, or minimize this claim.