It certainly raises some interesting questions about developer anonymity and whether the trustworthiness of an individual has bearing on the code they produce. Would people feel differently about Bitcoin if Satoshi was ever identified and had made questionable decisions on any previous projects they might have been involved with?
But there's a very important difference. By the time that Bitcoin was a significant project and the biggest bugs had been ironed out, satoshi no longer had any influence (post-December 2010).Vitalik has a huge amount of power and responsibility as a public figure. With the amount of control that he has over Ethereum to dictate its entire future, it's clear that he should be personally questioned and scrutinised.
Furthermore, when there are elements of ETH that appear problematic, like the scaling problems that it's experiencing similarly to Bitcoin, it's reasonable to think that when Vitalik is willing to take people's money for things he can't do, he might be out his depth with this one as well.
