My stance is a fairly liberal one.  I'm always inclined to take the position that everyone having complete and total freedom to run whatever code they choose is infinitely preferable to a scenario where one group dictates to all the other groups what they can or can't do.  I don't subscribe to the notion some people around here seem to endorse, that one single development team should make all the decisions for the rest of forever and everyone else should obey.  I'm happy to endure a little turbulence and open rebellion if it keeps the would-be authoritarians in this community in check.

The miners are perfectly entitled to secure a 2mb base and 6mb witness chain if that's what they want to do with their hashpower.  I don't know where anyone gets off thinking they can dictate to other people what chain they have to secure.  Similarly, the Core devs are perfectly entitled to change the mining algorithm on the 1mb base and 3mb witness chain making the miner's hardware all but useless on it.  In the end, everyone gets what they think they want.  At least until they change their mind when it doesn't work out as well as they thought it would.  Which could still happen after the fork.  The split might be permanent, but it might not.  We'll have to see how it plays out.

As for the poll, I support the right for SegWit2x to exist if people want it to.  I'm not sure if that's what you had in mind for an answer,  though.