But you're asking to comment on whether or not an action is moral. So you are, in essence, answering questions of morality.
But the questions are mostly bad. For example:
White socks uniform, player wears black socks. There's nothing immoral about it. It's kinda s****y, sure, but there's nothing wrong with doing so in of itself. He's a free human being and he's allowed to dress however the heck he wants. But if the question then said something like "The coach forced him to sit out for the next game for failing to abide by the uniform rules," then I'd very strongly say the action the coach took was moral. So depending on how the question is framed I can be both for and against the action the player took. As I said before, that's my problem with the quiz. It elicits a lot of "yeah, and?" responses because most of the questions are framed as "this person did something does that make you mad?"
The point is this quiz unfairly characterizes me as a libertarian because the questions are framed in a dumb way. To return to the question above: either I fill in the missing implication (i.e. I assume the question is about whether or not a coach would be justified in benching the player or kicking him off the team), or I answer the literal question presented me, in which case I answer 95% of the questions "agree strongly" and feel like I wasted a half hour taking a dumb quiz.
Then you just answer it as 'morally acceptable', if you don't think there's a moral dimension to the question.