Recently two moderators have made what I consider to be questionable rulings in the WA. Some WA rulings are not allowed to be appealed for a second opinion, but which ones are and which ones aren't remains rather opaque, so I'd like to ask whether we are allowed to seek a second opinion on either of these:
Ardchoille wrote:Global warming and ozone holes are RW violations because as far as we know they apply to only one planet, real-world, present-day Earth.
Kryozerkia wrote:Gun Control, be it "relax" or "tighten", is about degrees of control (background checks, etc), not outright prohibition of ownership. That would be Moral Decency, since it would be removing a right or privilege (depending on how a nation views gun ownership).
I've spoilered the commentary so it's there but it won't cause this thread to spawn a whole discussion: all I'm asking (again) is, can we ask for a second opinion on either, both, or neither of these rulings?