You don't care about doxing Satoshi and yet you created this thread suggesting another less recognized person to be the real Satoshi. I thought you would just share your idea about Satoshi being most likely poor rather than rich. But then you ended up pushing forward another Satoshi candidate. I though you wanted to respect the choice of Satoshi to be private? Why are you bringing this issue back when the British-Indian guy you're referring to has already been forgotten? That's what Satoshi wanted.
Not exactly, that guy I'm talking about came forward, he wanted to be known - otherwise why the article? - but wasn't taken seriously due to his social status.
Also the article was pure hearted as you expect Satoshi to be, not taken from a greedy PoV as CW for an instance.
