Nope, he's not explained anything at all, that I wouldn't already know from the website or the topic.
Okay, there are 3 names of the team members on the website, and there are also 2 nicknames of the guys from CET who provide escrow, but for all I know, "Ronald B. Sao", "Deepak Kumar" and "Catherine Oliver" may be non-existent.
I agree that nobody owes me any links, but tell me one good reason not to post them, that would outweigh the positive confidence buildup within community?
Yes, this is one of the measures of judging crypto - to know who the team is, to see what is their past experience and record. And they aren't only mine, there is a good topic on red flags in ICO here -
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2109970.0Thanks for the advice to stick to traditional forms of investments, but I think this advice is more appropriate for the people who don't research ICO enough and may end up broke after investing in a scam.
You're not wrong, but the fact is LinkedIn profiles can also be made up, or scammers can list the profiles of people who in real life have never heard of the ICO in question. Every ICO, short of, like, the brainchild of Vitalik Buterin and Da Hongfei, carries quite a bit of risk, and anyone who spends money on them that they can't afford is asking for trouble. You take a risk, and maybe you get rewarded or maybe you lose it all.
But more importantly, what are the incentives for a scammer? If the goal is to take the money and run, there are easier ways of doing it than the path WiC has been on (30+ pages on the original thread this spring, and now almost 90 on this one, active engagement with the community, partnerships with livecoin and reputable escrow-ers, etc.). You're unlikely to go through all that if you don't even plan to send out tokens. And if you do send out tokens, you might as well follow through with the idea at least far enough to pump the thing and get even more $$ out of it. In the latter case, ICO participants likely also do well.
The point is probably 1 ICO in 100 actually succeeds in the bigger picture, but from the perspective of the investor, ICOs are more about short-term profit than they are about finding the next ETH. With that in mind, the standards for judging the merits of an ICO change somewhat. It's less about 'will this really succeed?' and more about 'will this appeal to the extremely Lambo-obsessed crypto community enough to capture their attention and spike in value after release?".