There are still some parts of the story that haven't been told. Namely the details of what interactions exactly happened between CW and the people who claim to have secret knowledge of something about him.

In particular, Gavin has explained a little bit what the technical steps were, but he himself mentioned there were other, non-technical aspects that helped to convince him. Some nitty gritty details on those aspects would be nice.

Jon Matonis had coffee with CW and had "this weird feeling of having just met Satoshi." Later, for the "proof" session, he was convinced on three axis: "cryptographic, social, and technical".
The cryptographic bit, which should have been the least controversial, is something CW has not been able or willing to reproduce publicly, and he was careful to keep all artifacts that could have verified that it happened.
The technical bit is not very interesting. Knowledge of crypto and distributed protocols is a fairly low bar to reach. I could pass that bar convincingly enough, particularly if I crammed a bit beforehand.
The social bit is what interests me, since that's all we have left unexplored. Jon writes "The social evidence, including his unique personality, early emails that I received, and early drafts of the Bitcoin white paper, points to Craig as the creator."
So that's interesting. Unpublished early drafts of the whitepaper would be nice to share, along with whatever other detailed meaningful aspects could apply here.

There may be a temptation to keep those emails and similar such documents private. But this whole mess would probably not have happened this way if there hadn't been a willingness to go along with unnecessary secrecy and to assume things about CW that were not true (specifically, the assumptions that a meaningful proof of Satoshiness would be published.)

I guess we can wait for the inevitable book to come out, but there's a cautionary tale to tell here, and have it told soon is probably best.