don't be naive the 5 central devs could pretty much do what they wanted (gavin's even openly says this),
Source?
Knowing how carefully he states his opinions I find it hard to imagine him saying "I (we) can do whatever I want with Bitcoin".
Sounds like you've taken it out of context.
Have you followed any technical discussion about possible changes? I've seen a few and I've seen Gavin compromising on his original proposals.
What about 20mb block limit proposal? Majority (that participated in discussion) seems to agree (to the general idea of lifting current limit), but it doesn't look like it will be an easy thing to do and will likely end up with 2 alternative forks.
So where's that power?
Also, you didn't answer my question:
What/who is stopping you from becoming influential/valuable dev?
Why do you consider it as a closed group?
now the argument that majority wouldn't follow a bad play....well that could be valid if 1) the majority aren't apathetic AND 2) the majority understand the change and consequences (they'd believe the devs over and above the vocal few expressing the opposite view) AND 3) the majority had bitcoins best interest at heart rather then their own personal fiat gain.
becomes like fiat majority learn its dodge they'd still try and keep it in play for fear of system collapse.
That's not a problem exclusive to Bitcoin. That's wider, social problem. It's the same for every crypto.
Luckily as per "3)" in most cases: better Bitcoin=higher value=potential fiat gain.
you really think bitcoin would survive a split between the core devs and the majority of holders?
Yes. Easily. Majority will put their trust into other devs.
And what's the desired number of core devs (or other model) in your opinion?