...snip...
I can see why you felt the importance of pointing this out.
Now that these forks/counterfeits/competing versions are out there, isn't the 'ugly' scenario Satoshi referred to, virtually inevitable in the long-run ?
The problem (probably unforseen) has always been that a fork effectively creates a large number of holders with a significant stake in supporting both chains, in the same way that airdrops kick start projects. I'm not sure how that can be democratically mitigated.
It is inevitable in the long-run and cannot be democratically mitigated. That is exactly what satoshi meant with the last two sentences in that quote.
Again, this is why
all Bitcoin forks are counterfeit
derivatives of original bitcoin (BTC).
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_(finance)One cannot simply split from the underlying asset and expect the value to gain above the underlying
and majority consensus.
The 'fallout' in this regard will always be worse than the split. Hence, 'ugly'.