Subjective Morality?

[DLJ]

...
Then it would be no more accurate a picture of morality than creationism is an accurate picture of biology.  
...

An explanation in the form of information requires a mind to understand it. Evolution is similarly an explanation. It's algorithmic, as is morality.

...
Then best practivism is, properly, a form of moral realism.  

The two questions, which you answered seperately and disparately, are functionally equivalent.  You either do or don't think that it will be objectively true, and for anything to be objectively true, it must refer to mind independent facts.  That's what the term objective means in the first place.

Even the subjectivists contention that morality refers to mind dependent facts is asserted objectively, that purported fact is contended to be mind independent.   I appreciate that this may create confusion due to the ground being staked out by the respective positions...but hey, morality is complicated, whatever it is, eh?

It's actually not that complicated. But it is complex.

Objectively = quantitatively measurable
True = a label (t/f) attributed to a proposition for a given epistemology
Objectively true = quantitatively measurable proposition for a given epistemology

It could be similarly described as subjectively true in that it contains also qualitative metrics.

This is why the words 'subjective' and 'objective' are best avoided altogether.

The model of morality contains no morality.