This is a good question.

I should have precised inter-personal conflicts among devs, not technical consensus ones. On the technical philosophy, I think the people I’m singling out in my post are in agreement most of the time with my ideas, and vice-versa.

The debate or present conflict is on the conduct of the janitorial maintenance of the public communication channels at large, where Bitcoin domain experts are having usual conversations on technical consensus, while those channels being abused by some to damage one’s professional reputation.

Those channels are shared among all and usually administratively transferred among generations of devs on technical merits criteria. This is consistent with the claim that the Bitcoin development is the "private property” of no one. Otherwise that would mean all the discourse about “decentralization” of Bitcoin is baseless.

The problem of Faketoshi was not going to courts. In democratic societies where the rule of law is reigning this is the norm. The problem with Faketoshi a.k.a CWS was him producing a massive amounts of forged evidences, lying repeatedly in front of judge and engaging in fantasist stories about the past.

Beyond, there was a prominent bitcoin dev, far more veteran than I am, that have been to courts in the past years to defend his own professional reputation against allegations of a recognized applied cryptographer. I do not exactly remember the outcome in this case, though courts records are usually public, and one can go to read them.