In terms of whatever Peter Todd thinks of Wasabi, I tend not to care what one person's opinion is, regardless of who that person is. Gavin Andresen was a reputable contributor to bitcoin, and people blindly listening to his opinion has caused untold damage in this space. The opinion of one person is irrelevant, especially when that opinion can be bought. I care about the facts.
Bitcoin is a decentralized project and when it has been here for more years, it has been becoming more and more decentralized.
As part of Bitcoin history, we can not deny some facts that in early months, it is not a decentralized project with so much centralization on Satoshi Nakamoto, Gavin Andresen, sirius and some early programmers.
Things are very different with Bitcoin protocol to allow developers to join, and big upgrade must be decentralized voted by many nodes. A single developer nowadays can not change the Bitcoin protocol.
The power of community is decentralization so if one person, even had big contributions in the past, now start to mislead the project, will not be support by majority of Bitcoin community.
You are wrong about decentralization, that term is not used to define the development, since from version 0.1 Bitcoin has been decentralized in a sense that anyone could start mining, transacting without any permissions from anyone.
Ignore the exchanges, pools, regulations, as long as one can mine, send and receive Bitcoins, it's to be considered decentralized.
Now on topic, I wonder if samurai and watnotsabi use the same technology?
What exactly is needed to run such a service? honestly if both wallets are completely open source, then there is no need to point fingers and have such dramas, one could simply fork the wallet and start a new service, a better one.