Thanks for the summary, Sofia. Your point about this being an indicator of the growth of the movement really stands out to me!

I sense this is intended to help vegans be more tolerant of non-vegan allies? If so I wholeheartedly agree. 

One dynamic that I think is missing is that being vegan is probably our best tool to help people erase their inherent speciesm. People can eat animals and still think of them as deserving of moral standing, but I certainly find it more rare. In terms of building effort and activism, I find usually people need to have stopped eating animals/products. That being said, we are finding new pathways besides diet change to people being invested in animal protection. I celebrate that!

10% pledge doesn't have a negative association with the people who we have yet to convince. A better comparison would be to stop calling the movement Effective Altruism lol

I'm really excited to hear this, Dillon. I was kind of expecting the opposite response. Good on you. I appreciate your open mindedness and support for animal welfare. 

Great thinking! I'll DM you. If others are interested in doing something like this send me a message.

Excellent! Appreciate you <3

You rock, thanks!

Great case study! Thanks for offering yourself up as a data point. If you don't mind me asking, do you find it convincing to do something about factory farming (donate, diet change, political action, etc)? 

Yes, I agree. These are all good takes, and I'll own that I did not word my thoughts carefully enough for a constructive dialogue. 

My point is that FK has some media acumen that the entire movement is struggling with. We are not in the news nearly as much as we should be. Yes, there is a line of taking it too far. But FK has seen what doesn't work. They are experimenting and having nuanced success of getting earned media. I'm not saying it is justified, but I do think it is on the right track.

Kidnapping somebody would be a violent action. 

A better analogy of non violent direct action would be breaking in to disable the clinic's capabilities to provide abortions (without harming anybody).

In this case, the protesters would be subject to the same penalties under the law that the Ridglan protesters are. That being said, there is a case that what is happening to the dogs is illegal (311 counts of animal cruelty documented already). I'm wary of an appeal to authority bias here--just because they are not enforcing the law doesn't mean what Ridglan is doing is legal. As pointed out, the necessity defense is being tested here, and has reason for consideration.