...Some would like to learn more about half a century of (mis-directed) suspension design, and the story has intimate connections with cars and motorcycles....
And you will not get to the bottom of a topic like this through dumbing down so that absolutely everyone can understand everything. The best you can do is to explain the principles, so that with a little homework, non-specialists can be included in the discussions.
I competed in road races on the tubular space-frame version in the '80s and that confirmed my view that independent suspension would never work. Current mountain bikes FAIL on response efficiency. How many riders prefer a hard-tail for racing and stiffen up the front fork, so it doesn't pogo?
Likewise, I bought a Moulton AM7 back in 1986. Though the concept of small wheels and suspension was good the limitations of putting motorbike suspension on a bicycle were very apparent: Frightening front end dive when braking. And the sapping of energy on hill climbs. It was back then that I started to analyse the physics involved. It was then that I first realised that bicycles would require suspension systems designed specifically to address these issues.
So, a bicycle-specific design could have been adopted when MTBs first moved into full suspension, but nobody understood the need, not even Alex Moulton. He could see that my road-racing prototypes worked (they were raced without damping), but he suffered from the same 'not-invented-here' syndrome that caused industry to dismiss his ideas twenty years before.
Despite being innovative in his use of structures and spring design, for some reason Moulton could not see the limitations of his suspensions. But when I first saw an article on Dave's interconnected road bike it immediately made perfect sense as it could prevent a bicycle with suspension from behaving like a rocking horse. I still have the cutting of that magazine article somewhere.
9/16" Suntour BMX MP-1000 pedals / 56 tooth TA 6-bolt chainring.(I'm not bothered if the teeth are worn or damaged)