The way you use SAFE Network doesn’t have to be the way the other 7 billion people may use it.
The way forward for you is not necessarily the way forward for everyone.
A way forward against a corrupt authority is what we both want but your way forward isn’t necessarily the same way forward that I would take. I think there are many ways forward but that you will not get anywhere if you have limited flexibility. If SAFE Network can only be used for one niche purpose for a marginal demographic then good luck pushing your way forward by yourself.
You don’t represent the entire SAFE Network and you don’t represent the majority of human beings on planet earth.
The views differ on how much anonymity is necessary and for what reasons people desire to be anonymous. A purpose of having a human identity is so you can have elections (if you believe in democracy). Most human beings appreciate democracy and while I might agree with you on not wanting authoritarian government I’m not a person who thinks it’s possible to have a society without any form of government at all. If there is going to be some form of governance then you need reputation, voting mechanisms, and a way to prove you’re not a machine.
If you still want to fork it then go ahead and fork it. But I think it’s a waste of time to create two separate platforms just because you don’t want to use SAFE Network in a particular way. For example if I decide that I want anonymity with certain people but not with other people then it should be flexible enough that I can choose the level of anonymity for every interaction and if it’s not then I will use the fork which offers the most flexibility (for technical and statistical reasons).
Let users have choice and control over their identity and anonymity.
If you don’t want to be pseudo-anonymous then don’t identify yourself and let a random number act as a name. It’s not like you’re forced. On the other hand some decentralized applications require it and the vast majority of the people of earth actually want to be able to have some kind of identity. Why not let them do what they want?
Most human beings want a reputation of some sort. While they might not want to give up pseudo-anonymity there is no reason why they have to. You can have pseudo-anonymous reputation systems so the idea that you must either by fully anonymous at all times or fully public with your real name and address is ridiculousness. It’s also ridiculous to expect that the billions of people who could use SAFE Network are all going to want to be anonymous all the time.
The way not to have to deal with this pointless political bickering is to let the user decide for themselves how they want to interact on SAFE Network. If you don’t want to have a reputation or ID then don’t give yourself one but if you do then have one. There is no reason to have two separate networks because other people having a reputation or even putting their full name and address on SAFE Network should not affect you.