NoGreenerMan

How would you know if someone with a high post count and a non-donator status isn't going through a financially difficult time in their life? Excluding people if they haven't given money would mean freedomainradio is no longer free domain and operating according to voluntaryist principles. Down-voting a post because of a characteristic of the poster (non-donator) is not compatible with a community that values philosophy. How would you propose to ostracise 'the free riders' consuming podcasts costing more resources to host and stream compared to text on a virtual board?

Labmath2 makes good points. Trump coverage is boring to me. It's repetitive as is mainstream media. I'm also not interested in somebody who bows down to the lobby of a foreign country. I much prefer listening to a philosophy show with philosophical discussions as its primary content and guests who are learned in philosophy.

Also... What makes you assume an action is morally neutral if it results in no person being harmed? Think cheating on a partner without being caught, stealing from or mutilating a dead body, necrophilia, defamation of someone's memory, etc. What makes you assume an action is morally neutral if it results in no conscious person being harmed? Think of the things you can't do to a comatose patient even one with no hope of recovery. Think destroying a tree. What makes you assume transgressing against another party is only possible if their potential is realised in the now? Think of the comatose patient who needs months of cerebral healing and reconfiguration. Think of little trees.