Of course I had a few assumptions before but I asked as some form of discussion to see if I am wrong. Some people had good explanations and I upvoted them, even though I don't agree.

With this objectivity thing: I was just pointing out that there is a HUGE difference between ethics and morality. So most vegans I know draw conclusions from general concepts (e.g. life itself has some value so killing is bad in general) but I do think other people might draw other conclusions from these or other concepts (and I want to argue with them about their conclusions) so it's not about being objectively right at all.

Most people going vegan are doing this for ethical reasons, which is the opposite of subjective morality, since the entire point of ethics is, that it does not allow subjective morality.

My point is, that everything about veganism on Lemmy (even in vegan communities) keeps getting downvoted for "too preachy", even though it often just points out facts, while the same people are literally preaching the Word Of Richard Stallman.

You're right but in my experience on Lemmy so far, it need way more for Firefox or Linux comments to be considered preachy while pointing out facts like "producing meat leads to animal abuse" is considered too preachy.

I'm not really biased in this since I'm biased towards both equally. Just wondering why everything mentioning veganism in any way on Lemmy (like this post) keeps getting downvoted.

Not really obvious to me. I'm bashing corporate brands as a "morally driven life choice" as well.