We're requesting that Steem power holders tell us "We won't support witnesses that freeze funds now that more understanding has been reached.

I’m not one of the largest stakeholders but am significant compared to some. I can state my position.

I would unapprove any witness who once again initiates a full freeze of your funds. I would continue supporting witnesses if the soft fork is reinstated in such a way as to only block witness votes. This should be agreeable to you if your stated stance that you do not wish to participate in governance is honest.

In the interim I would encourage witnesses to revisit the possibility of changes to the governance model such that even large amounts of stake have much more difficulty controlling 17+ witness seats.

I fully believe it was a Herculean effort by the witnesses to attain consensus on freezing your funds, and it was a precaution pending meetings and discussions on your plans and intent. As such I see no risk that your funds will be destroyed. The much greater risk is the destruction of your investments value should failed negotiations lead to a split of the chain.