No extra cost to warming [...] Sea level is rising as we warm up from the little ice age, and much land is subsiding.

Whatever the cause, we would need to mitigate sea level rises with measures such as relocation or sea walls, all of which are costly. The best available science points to AGW as the cause of the rise, and therefore it makes sense to pay for the mitigation with AGW sources.

it benefits agriculture and humans do well in warmth, much better than cold.

The problem is that the "warming" is an average of far wilder fluctuations in weather. The earth doesn't just get uniformly a bit warmer, and the localized effects can be devastating. More importantly, even if a bit of warming is beneficial on the average, continuing the trend - especially past a certain threshold into a feedback loop of uncontrollable warming - is obviously foolish. Unless you claim to know exactly how much greenhouse gasses we can release into the atmosphere for best effect, it would be prudent to not find out the hard way.

Pollution from cars--hmm, not much lately since the advent of catalytic converters.

"Today’s on-road vehicles produce over a third of the carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides in our atmosphere", says the Union of Concerned Scientists. The bottom of that article discusses the pollution's effects on public health.

Because a good deal of the cost of gasoline has been externalized. Below are some examples:

1. The efforts of the US Navy to maintain peace in the middle east shipping lanes. The US consumed some 134 billion gallons of gasoline in 2013, and the budget of the US Navy is about $150 billion. It's reasonable to assume that a few cents per gallon should be charged to help pay for the Navy.
2. The increased incidences of respiratory diseases due to air pollution. Medical care is expensive in the US, and things that harm public health should at the very least help pay for it.
3. The costs of global warming.

Obviously, gasoline is not the sole driver of these, but it makes sense to better account for the true cost of using gasoline. Note that the gasoline tax has not changed in absolute terms since 1993, which means it's lost about 40% of its value to inflation.

This isn't to say that the 12 cent proposal is fair, or that sharply increasing gasoline prices is wise, but that a gradual increase to match its true cost is sensible.

Google basically was/is the sole supporter of Mozilla anyway.

One call from Google and this guy's gone.

Khyber goes all internet tough guy and gets banned. AC says that was the wrong thing to do. Seems that DDOS threats are supposed to be funny?

...don't create a vile and toxic cease-pit of comments just because you hate the mild inconvenience of whatever issue with the beta you have

This goes both ways. It is not uncommon that the protestors are disliked for "disrupting" the everyday patterns of those who do not care about the issue at hand. Only apathy should be disliked. So, thank you for voicing your dislike of the protestors. However i would suggest some patience until all the ruckus is over.

Sounds like victim blaming. "Beta didn't do it. You did it by not accepting Beta." There is always resistance to change. But the change has to at least bring something better to the table. Not a reduction in functionality. If the villagers didn't riot and just left quietly instead then you would still be left wanting better comments.