@hamnchess, I would politely request that you stop this "reverse trolling" of sorts, that you are doing.

You may not believe that this ICO is a scam. That is your right to believe that, personally.
Others do not have to share those beliefs.

You say if people referred "spam and shit people", you aren't allowed to complain.
Now hold on a second. The referrals were not required to make a purchase. They were required to verify their email. That is the issue here.
The change in the rules, not the quality of the people signing up.

Just because the exchange works, doesn't mean WCX has not deceived all of the people creating referrals.
Just because the CEO is smart and intelligent doesn't make WCX honest, regarding the policy change.
Just because purchasing XT works like a charm doesn't mean that WCX did not change the rules half way through the game.
Just because KYC is easy doesn't mean that it was specified as required at the start of the ICO.
Just because support answers quickly doesn't mean that WCX has acted honestly regarding referrals.
Just because the telegram channel is "transparent" doesn't mean that the rules weren't changed after everyone put in all the work.

Here is these peoples' argument. (If I may be so bold as to speak for others).
It isn't right, nor fair, to change a contract once one side is done with their obligation. None of the referrers got a say in the new policy. So they did all of the marketing work for WCX, and now that the rules have changed, are going to get only a fraction of what they were originally promised.

You come in here calling those who disagree with you "idiots", and "beggars". That is not polite discourse, and is doing neither you, nor WCX any help.

As to your secondary questions:
They might be continuing to work because they are STILL seeking more money for their ICO.
Their releasing a fully functional exchange has nothing to do with their integrity on the aspect of referrals.
How could it be a scam? Plenty of fully functional exchanges ended up scamming. Does Mt Gox ring a bell?

Just because people do not share your view of a certain ICO does not make them stupid, beggars, or uninformed.
I believe that the measure was put into place solely for the purpose of limiting the amount that WCX has to pay out. Which is not as per the original agreement.

You are welcome to disagree, but let's keep the conversation somewhat civil. Neither side looks good when they resort to vulgarity, or
 namecalling, regardless of how disappointed they are.