nor his comments that the block size limit was only a temporary measure.
Satoshi never said that block size limit was temporary measure. He only said that it can be increased when needed, thats exactly position of core devs and me personally (note he never said it should be removed).
Actually Satoshi seemed to be very much against block size bloat and did not even want namecoin on top of bitcoin.
Core developers are more inline with "Satoshi's vision" then Gavin, who wants to get rid of block limit altogether.
Not that I think its a valid argument, but I hate how Hearn and big-blockers try to hijack Satoshi and claim to speak for him.
Agreed, temporary was the wrong way to frame it. A need basis was what I was trying to convey. My personal view is that bitcoin's decentralized nature (i.e. self-validation) is integral to its function. Any technical issues, like blockchain bloat, should be measured against that. Centralization pressures are paramount to capacity issues, always -- if the whitepaper has anything to say about "Satoshi's vision," it's that.