In my opinion morally acceptable acts (for those are determined by social consensus) are usual therefore immoral acts are easier to define. For example, if A through Z behaviors are regarded as moral, and numbers -1…-10 are immoral behaviors, in a book full of letters the numbers stand out so even speed readers can see them.
Because morality is defined by actual social behavior that passes without substantive reproof when the majority is wrong about the right or wrongness of moral acts good and moral acts may be punished and immoral acts rewarded.
Socrates noted a particular kind of situation in a different context- one where a completely evil guy is enriched, promoted and admired socially though he has a hidden side of wickedness unknown to the public, and the public is fooled into believing the fellow is a paragon of goodness.
If there are transcendent moral systems, rule based, that are absolute, deontological duties given by God (actually) then failure to cohere within moral norms have a high possibility of eternal or significant negative reinforcement. If morality is determined by ruling pejorative political opinions that Democrats, for instance, or Chief Justice Roberts force upon the public with the help of the corporate world who enjoy manipulating the public perhaps into easy compliance with behaviors that reinforcement social stratification through the concentration of wealth, then negative reinforcement may be more proximal in regard pejoratively defined immoral behavior such as writing publicly in opposition to homosexual marriage.
Cancelling moral norms of thousands of years longevity as functions and derivatives of evolution theory and population density globally may be approved for various political and economic reasons as simple ways to evolve political economy democratically (nominally at least though it is forced by elites). Relatively abstractly designed artificial new moral norms engineered to advance temporal political economics may have unintended consequences of less than optimal substance in comparison to moral criteria satisfying all sides or most sides concerned with important moral issues.