That I will not deny, but tell me which other group of developers are as good as Core?
Given we only talk about the pure protocol level and that I can only answer for myself here -
my conclusion was that a perfect protocol is as tiny as possible and does not contain any magical numbers and does not need other layers on top
Ok but you know I would disagree and ask what "magical numbers" are you talking about? Are you insinuating that the Core developers are using "magic computer science" to maintain Bitcoin?
for its most attractive and basic function (exchange money for nearly free or fees < 1cent ) it cannot be the core that came after Gavin.
There will always come an external cost on any system. Internalize on that very deeply.
So I fell back to check, what Satoshi really did / plan and I decided that BCH is the better implementation- and btw one big feature from Satoshi was, that real ppl do not matter at all - Satoshi's Bitcoin is anti-fragile to that, so no need at all to check / qualify any individuals.
Then we should follow Satoshi like a high priest of a religion? Is that how the community should decide what is and what is not Bitcoin?
Plus you did not answer which group of developers are as good as the Core developers.