I suggest the name of the "Animal Welfare" fund is too restrictive, and the name adopted instead be broader, such as "Non-Human Animal Issues," to encompass such efforts as personhood, abolition, cultured meat,for example, in additional to welfare concerns.
You might draw the conclusion that recidivists may not have gone veg for ethical or altruistic reasons; wonder if getting them to pledge veg again should lean on those motivations?
I suggest the name of the "Animal Welfare" fund is too restrictive, and the name adopted instead be broader, such as "Non-Human Animal Issues," to encompass such efforts as personhood, abolition, cultured meat,for example, in additional to welfare concerns.
You might draw the conclusion that recidivists may not have gone veg for ethical or altruistic reasons; wonder if getting them to pledge veg again should lean on those motivations?