So what I gather so far here:
* The ICO was a shitshow due to poor instructions and guidance - the very first part of the project was a total clusterfuck
* NVO has missed - by large margins - every deadline or estimate they've given. "Days away" has turned into months, for example.
* NVO has been terrible at communicating and has no central source of information or updates - and can't be bothered to update the one official place they have (their website)
* NVO has provided literally no proof of any work or accomplishments so far
* No one knows anything about any of the developers except that some are also involved in other similarly unfinished/non-responsive projects
Does that sum up where we are?
Outside of blind faith, what is the trust-in-NVO argument based on? What have the developers shown you that suggests they can:
* Build the NVO exchange
* Develop an actual clientele and address the various customer service and other issues that will come up
* Make it profitable and bring in consistent revenues
* Reliably deliver the shares of profits to NVO Token holders
I actually thought the ICO was fine, people just can't follow directions in cryptoland.
Deadlines do tend to get missed in software engineering though, and they do have hard evidence of progress.
Their communication definitely could be better, maybe like a weekly update on the website or something. Just a paragraph here and there would go a long way.
I've heard that there are more than just two devs on the project (they hired more with the ICO funds).
Hopefully they can bring everything you noted below to the table.
It's good to hear other perspectives, maybe we can get some others to chime in.
This guy actually thinks that being a few weeks late on software is a big deal? So many people have never lived in reality. Anytime you have a project, stuff goes wrong and issues come up.