"Core supporters" want development to be centralized in the hands of a few guys.
Everyone else wants decentralized development and multiple implementations.
I don't think that you "get it" - if we have multiple versions of Bitcoin then what are the exchanges supposed to do (they can only accept one if they don't want to lose money)?
So your idea is to decentralise something that basically cannot be (have you really thought this idea through?).
Forking is not the same as creating alts - so if Gavin and others want to create an alt then why don't they just do that?
for atleast 2 years there have been many different versions, all working side by side.. happily..
this is because the main rules are the same.. but who coded the version doesnt matter.. what language the version was wrote in, doesnt matter. as long as the basic rules of each version match, they all get to use, talk to and be involved with the same chain..
so here is blockstreams agenda
"lets discredit any programmer that is not in the blockstream roadmap"
heres R3
"lets destroy bitcoin and get people back into fiat2.0"
heres the community
"as long as my version can handshake with other versions and happily relay data that i can validate.. i dont care what band camp of programmers made it. as long as there is no dodgy code"