Lots of ICO are conducting KYC why to know the identity of the investors. But lets reverse it this way on 2 biggest Crypto Bitcoin and Etherium. Bitcoin founder is Satoshi Nakamoto while Ethereum is Vitalik Buterin between these 2, Etherium's creator revealed himself in public and roaming around the globe to raise awareness of his project to community while bitcoins`s founder still remain anonymously but his project dominate`s the market. Wow very hard to choose right?
Many people still fond of bitcoin but they don't know who actually create it. Mean what's were patronizing here is the product and not the person behind it. Logical but that's the fact. Its impossible no one knew who actually made it cause he didn't do it alone.
Now answering my title question on my opinion, I prefer the revealed creator rather than the anonymous guy even though they both have amazing product. Why? cause this will be in history and you don't want to recognize a screen name when that person make an enourmous advancement in technology.
It doesn't matter.
For ICO purposes, of course someone that is verified as a real life person would generate a lot more interest and get a lot more funding in my opinion than an ICO with a team that is completely anonymous. This is because of the risk factors involved in every single ICO, and the ability for the founder to just run away with your funds.
But if it's simply a project that does not have a premine or ICO, one does not need to have a verified team at all. Just like Bitcoin itself, decentralized networks doesn't need a verified founder to run, or even an active one for that sake.
But as I said, if in the strict context of ICOs, then I'd definitely prefer a known, preferably well known public figure in the crypto space.