But it is against my belief and values to tamper with someone else account and assets.

With the same logic, would you have supported the HF9, which recovered stoled funds? Source

From a purely idealistic PoV, I can understand your stance. But the real world simply isn't idealistic.

There is a big difference between:

• stake on accounts belonging to Steemit Inc, the company that unfairly mined STEEM in the past and made social contracts to only use those funds for the Steem ecosystem
• and every other account.

With your logic, ever since HF9, people could have lost trust in Witnesses controlling the stake, but thinking that would be absurd.

Same goes for the SF 222. It was a highly targeted security measure, to make sure that those funds, promised to be used for Steem, are also going to be used that way. Just because Ned sold his company, those social contracts are NOT simply nullified.

People invested time & money on here, based on those promises given. And, we, the stakeholders that are voting for the SF 222, are now demanding that those promised funds are not just going away, potentially harming the whole ecosystem; but are going to be used for Steem - however that may look like.

Also, most STEEM that was sold, was actually from those early days, which is also a reason why the STEEM price tanked harder than most others. Empty promises & hard sells from the company who created the software.

Anyway, I respect your stance, but I disagree with it.