I think most still wonder, "What does that do? Why not sign publicly if he has the keys?"
There are several very good reasons, albeit not obvious to those who think Satoshi is subject to what I'll call the Standard Assumption. The Standard Assumption is the usually unstated, often unnoticed, and always unacknowledged assumption in academia and other cultures where status is based on perceived merit - such as in open source and cypherpunk cultures - that "everyone else faces the same bottleneck as I do: that of demonstrating their merit in the culture; everyone is desperate to show this at all the times that it can be, and at least would never have a casual disregard for their image as meritorious [as judged by the rules of the culture, or as would be judged by authority figures in the field]."
If we do a proper provisional reasoning, we again have:
Scenario 1: He is not Satoshi.
Scenario 2: He is Satoshi.
In (1) we are left wondering why he would end up not being subject to the Standard Assumption. Could be the money, could be insanity, could be he is just an odd duck. None of those are all that convincing, so under (1) - where he is definitely not Satoshi - it is reasonable to suspect he is just a bumbling fool that is trying his best to demonstrate merit in his field but failing spectacularly, with numerous howlers and even the third rail in academia: readily noticeable plagiarism.
In (2), however - where he definitely is Satoshi - we hardly have to wonder why the Standard Assumption doesn't apply to him: he has already experienced living as the undispute king, even to some a god, in the field for years. He has already changed the face of history and everyone close to him likely also knows it. His merit is sky high, towering above everyone else for years even in absentia. He has no need for more merit/status in the culture of crypto; at most he might sometimes hanker for some recognition directly rather than as a persona, but it certainly wouldn't be a surprise if he had a casual disregard for his "real life" image...especially among the crypto community culture, which Satoshi has grown to hate and has no respect for (remember this is the scenario where Craig is definitely Satoshi).
In fact at that level, like for all the rich and famous, the bottleneck becomes filtering people, keeping away sycophants and the unthinking, knowing who can think critically and who can be trusted, knowing who looks at a posting of his and nitpicks that it doesn't conform with academic standards or is very sloppily edited or version controlled and who reads it for the content and doesn't care if he lifted some text from elsewhere rather than reinvent the wheel by being a good little academic and remixing it for no reason other than so that it no longer is considered academic misconduct.
Observing that Satoshi has both fuck-you money and fuck-you status in the context of the Standard Assumption, this result shouldn't be surprising, as odd as it may appear to a reddit gawker who had already built up an image of Satoshi the Saint.
I invite everyone to play with Scenario 2 further, to suspend your disbelief as a rationality exercise (you will balance it by doing the same for Scenario 1, if you haven't done enough of that already, only finally turning to assessing which one makes more sense at the very end).
In (2), a progressive reveal has considerable perks; one can milk every last shade between proven and unproven. We know Satoshi has many things he wants to accomplish after all, one of which is to kill the altcoins and in general to drive away those he sees as bad for the space. He wants whatever Craig wants, remember? (And if you're finding these reminders at all necessary, that's exactly why doing this provisional thinking properly is so important to the Satoshi question.)
A slow drip of gradients of proof via hints, demonstrations of deep understanding no one else had, inventions he is in no hurry to explain, private proofs to individuals, proofs to courts of law (with actual signing info sealed), and indeed things like domain purchase records, etc. function to keep the skeptics - which as this includes most of his enemies means he is doing a fantastic job - clinging to Scenario 1, in the dark, unable to mount an effective defense to what he has coming. You see, Satoshi's goal is bigger (because Craig's is - we're still in (2)): "Bitcoin is a wheel and I am building a car." And after he left disheartened by the direction Bitcoin had taken even as Core damaged it, the hour is now late. Another halving approaches. He cannot afford to waste an opportunity.
Like a good Go player, he leaves aji (unresolved questions) everywhere, plays with shades of influence instead of going for the kill right away, lulls his opponents into a false sense of security regarding his abilities, subtly cuts off his opponents' options, rarely does the obvious thing, and makes moves that perform multiple functions at once.
/scenario (but feel free to explore these scenarios more, just being careful never to switch between them midway through without noticing)
The conclusions of the anti-Craig faithful and their inability to see many things that are right in front of them does not mean they are fools, or even lacking in intelligence, even in brilliance. It only means they either haven't thought about what a proper assessment of the question entails or that something such as pride or other emotional factor is temporarily interfering with their objectivity (as we all know in other areas of life, anger and ridicule are telltale signs someone has lost their objectivity regarding their object of ridicule*).
*Some will point out that Craig falls into this as well. I agree. He often doesn't give people he disagrees with a fair shake. But that has nothing to do with him being Satoshi or not. (Yes Satoshi was usually amiable, but so were many. Circumstances change people; we have so many examples of this on both sides.)
