If the refund is delayed significantly, or indefinitely, by this claim, my suspicion grows even stronger that they can't provide blockchain evidence of funds and transactions to process the 'refund' which has been agreed to.
You need to stop reading the posts from Vlom. He has failed his own due diligence to the point where he thinks the statements of the CEO regarding the duties of escrows, rather than the statements from the escrows themselves (4), are 'de facto' what will happen. The refund is not being delayed at all.Also, I'm not sure if returning like 40-60% of the original investment asset (Bitcoin) is legal simply because it is worth more in dollars.
The dollar value is irrelevant. The release milestones were in place; without them I doubt that there would have been any funds left given the *dispute* that went down in Algeria.I honestly wouldn't be surprised if this shit blows up GAW style.
No. Things are going to according to the milestones. As I've said earlier, as far as failed/cancelled/bad ICOs go, this isn't nowhere as bad as it could have gotten. The fallout hasn't been handled as well as it could have been, but that is not in my power.If anybody involved on either side of this thinks they can be a slick little grease ball and slide out of this situation and it will all just disappear with time you might want to ask our homeboy Homero how that's going for him 
Apples and oranges. I truly believe this is the next big scandal to send shockwaves through the industry.
This is no scandal of any kind[1]. Do you know of any project on this scale that (partially) refunded their investors?[1] Well, some trolls did jump at getting media to use "exit scam" wording which just shows their own lack of research.