Yeah, im sure Satoshi wanted to be the benevolent dictator of Bitcoin:
https://coinjournal.net/gavin-andresen-mike-hearn-will-be-the-benevolent-dictator-of-bitcoinxt/Im sure Satoshi wanted to have anti-privacy features on Bitcoin:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-xt-fork-can-blacklist-tor-exits-may-reveal-users-ip-addressesAnd im sure Satoshi wanted to hardfork Bitcoin when he said repeatedly and clearly how he didn't want his software forked:
I don't believe a second, compatible implementation of Bitcoin will ever be a good idea. So much of the design depends on all nodes getting exactly identical results in lockstep that a second implementation would be a menace to the network. The MIT license is compatible with all other licenses and commercial uses, so there is no need to rewrite it from a licensing standpoint.
I know, most developers don't like their software forked, but I have real technical reasons in this case.
Please stop pretending any of these people is Satoshi.