http://www.riddellwilliams.com/blog/articles/post/hard-fork-conspiracy-treacherousConclusion
The current proposed “hard fork” replacement software seems at first blush to be a reasonable way to solve Bitcoin’s growth issues. However, due to the lack of consensus of applicable Bitcoin network participants, the enactment would create serious legal consequences for the creators of the new replacement software, unless the creators adhere to the rules of MSB registration and compliance. In addition, the “hard fork” would create serious operational issues for exchanges and wallet operators, the risk of liability for participating miners, and unnecessary confusion in the marketplace.
Satoshi knew this, and this is why he never wanted to be known, he disappeared so the creator is "no one".
Thank god that sanity has prevailed and we are sticking with the best team (Core) to develop the full node, and the fact that anyone wanting to hard fork would need to comply with FinCEN's requerimetns makes hard forks even harder.
Of course, this is actually bad because im not saying every hardfork ever is a trojan horse attempt like XT and Classic. But for now, it's obvious that the team doing all the important developments in Bitcoin is Core team and it's the team that has proved to be the most privacy friendly and node-decentralized friendly, so it's like i've taken a weigh off my shoulder to know that Classic got rejected:
http://www.coinfox.info/news/4781-bitcoin-classic-rejected-for-the-sake-of-segwitNow please, let's focus on making Bitcoin better, and don't bother the Core devs with hard forks unless the team attempting a hard fork proves to develop really useful stuff like confidential transactions, libsecp256k1, OP_HOLD, sidechains, segwit... because otherwise they will only be seen as amateur opportunists like the Toomin brothers with their Classic attempt.
Good luck everyone and see you on the moon.
