I see your interpretation now, my apologies. When I read "scheme" I understood that to be slander and mean satoshi had malicious intentions. If you understand scheme to simply be a benign way of suggesting his plan was wrong then it de-escalates this entire conversation.
I thought you were defending the a comment claiming satoshi was being malicious. I would've done better to search for a more charitable interpretation.
Persono, I think that Satoshi was an idealist but not a saint and the reasons that the funds have not been accessed are not due to altruism.
If Satoshi did stretch the truth or lie in that quote, I would be inclinded to view it as motivated by ideolatry rather than greed. However, any speculation as to motives is fairly pointless given the lack of information.
The entire conversation started because someone pointed out that just because Satoshi said something doesn't mean it has to be true (although they made that point in a rude way.)
The vibe I am getting from your responses is: 'satoshi is a saint, everything he said has to be true, and any attempt to point out that we have little evidence about Satoshi's character is a baseless smear.'
I am sure that is an inaccurate and unfair characterization of what you are trying to see, so please correct me as to where I have it wrong.