It's a natural consequence of a consensus mechanism.  New ideas can quickly become divisive.  If someone wants to implement features that are fundamentally incompatible with the current network rules, the only way to implement that feature at protocol level is to propose a fork and see who goes along with it.  Alternatively you can sometimes build a new layer on top of the base protocol, but that's not always a viable option for some ideas.  Gavin and Mike made their clients and tried to implement their ideas via hardfork (rightly or wrongly, however people choose to perceive it), but were unsuccessful.



There is insufficient evidence for this assertion.  You are once again attempting to portray your theory that Kleiman and Wright are satoshi as though it were some sort of fact.  It is nowhere close to being a fact.  Please recall the difference between education and indoctrination.  You're putting your credibility on the line again.