How can Bitcoin be stated as the fork when it continued as it did previously.   The majority voted for Bitcoin development to continue along its path hence the general disagreement with any other coin trying to label itself as Bitcoin when it has not passed this majority test.

The modification is Bitcoin cash ?  Its the fork and it carries the minority with it, isnt this correct.   I dont mind the existence of BCH or the attempt to take another direction even, that is the consequence of open source and a free market open to all.     Its not the original Bitcoin though, it should have really taken a new name.    I get the fees argument but obviously that was recognised as a problem by not just the BCH team but also the 'core' Bitcoin devs.