I may be misunderstanding the reason for the example. You were talking about revolt and what threshold of support was required originally. My trend was personal experiences involving revolt where most talk more than they act when huge sacrifice is necessary. A common problem in politics in general. So, this is a pledge to not put together data that can be used for (basically) targeting minorities, destroying such data, the backups, etc. Also boycotting work for them and legal resistance. It follows they must be refusing to work at such places (eg Facebook, Google), not using their products/services, pushing for changes at them if they do work there before quiting if there's No's, preventing it in other companies via business model, and so on. They would expect change in tech company practices to result due to this pledge/revolt.
We'll be able to judge their current commitment based on their employment and if they boycott all such surveillance services with forms of PII that can be used for targeting. The latter due to Vote With Wallet concept of not financially supporting evil companies. We'll see if it fits my pattern by looking for whether a huge percentage of developers are committed to this over maybe next year or so. Also what changes happen in these companies' data collection and retention practices due to pressure from the pledge/revolt causing enough high-talent turnover. My pattern, if they fall victim to it, says they'll remain a tiny percentage of tech employees, probably use surveillance-powered goods, and likes of Google or Facebook continue collecting a trove of data that benefits such targeting since pressure didnt work.
I hope it does work, though, as I support the goals of the pledge. I'll leave this tangent at that.