No/yes/maybe arent answers to the question whether it's good or bad so I cant answer. My belief is it would be bad even if he turned out to behave idealisticly. As I've pointed out before, the power of bitcoin is its governance model over the source code. If someone had sufficient technical influence over its direction, as he apparently had while he was involved, the trust in its value would dissolve like any other shitcoin.
Yes it would be good or bad for BTC?
No it wouldn't be good or bad for BTC?
Maybe it wouldn't be good or bad for BTC?
The poll doesn't make sense.
However, to respond in faith, I think it would most likely not be a good thing, and would also depend if this/these person(s) were still alive as to how it would be perceived. If they were alive then their future actions would constitute instruction as to how to act on Bitcoin which I think would be a negative.
Do I think it would ultimately cause irreparable damage? Most likely not. The concept is strong enough to withstand just about anything and I don't think we have to worry to too much about that now.
It doesn't matter at this point. Weak hands would probably sell while those who understand Bitcoin would buy the dip and we're back to where it started. If Satoshi has an opinion about Bitcoin and where it should be going he's free to submit a BIP just like anyone else. If he tries to change the rules without due process he can go fuck himself, I'm not accepting his changes anyway!