And what about the inverse? If he is Satoshi, why didn't he just put out a signed statement saying he is Craig? Satoshi seemed perfectly capable of producing valid signatures (and he could do it without a 25-page blog post).
Stop giving him the benefit of the doubt. He couldn't produce a valid signature. He couldn't move old coins. He couldn't explain the blockchain with anything more than an amateur understanding of it (his article describing mining had at least 2 major factual errors I could pick out in the first 2 paragraphs). When he realized he couldn't keep the charade up, he gave up. It's really that simple.
My read on that is that Satoshi felt sorry for the hapless Japanese-American guy with tech media showing up at his house.
In contrast, Craig Wright asked for this.
Why would he? He felt sorry for Dorian, why would he step into this mess and get tangled in this story.
When the Dorian Nakamoto stuff happened the real Satoshi put out a statement saying he's not Dorian. That wasn't that long ago.
If he did that you'd think he'd step up and say he's not Craig Wright either. But maybe he did the previous one because he felt Dorian was being victimized whereas Craig Wright has made a mess of his own design.
It's hard to say for sure.