Ha!
it seems to me that @CryForaCoin may be the creator of that project that has a fake team, I say this because of that:
he was inactive for 2 years and see that the site is offline. if it was just a "bug" in the standard wordpress model as he said, then they would not take the site offline and continue with the project, but he took the site offline because there should be no project, the intention was to steal the money from people. I saw some cases where even as a plagiarized whitepaper or fake team the project continues, perhaps because the people who performed it had or have good intentions but used bad methods.
if he has been inactive for 2 years then he would not come back to ask to remove that feedback, he will buy account and run another project and will improve himself so that it is not easily discovered in the other scam project
That's what I've been waiting for.
Even if, in retrospect, it was not morally correct, the mission was not even apparent, the intention behind it was never simply to pull people's money out of their pockets.
Transparency is probably not my strength, but you can believe me or not.
The only other account on Bitcointalk was created on the same day (yieldly or something similar as username) and only because my original user account no longer knew the name. Well, puff cake.
Wasn't right. You don't do that. And I probably won't be so deceptive again.
This is the bad effect of the bounty managers who have been accepting jobs without pay first or escrow first from the project because the owners will just move on to someone else to do it.
it seems to me that @CryForaCoin may be the creator of that project that has a fake team, I say this because of that:
Trust summary for CryForaCoin
This user recently woke up from a long period of inactivity.
This user recently woke up from a long period of inactivity.
he was inactive for 2 years and see that the site is offline. if it was just a "bug" in the standard wordpress model as he said, then they would not take the site offline and continue with the project, but he took the site offline because there should be no project, the intention was to steal the money from people. I saw some cases where even as a plagiarized whitepaper or fake team the project continues, perhaps because the people who performed it had or have good intentions but used bad methods.
Sadly we cannot rule this problem out from its root but have to use these methods to flagNtag the accounts. I am sure the tagged user will come back asking for flag removal pretty soon. 
if he has been inactive for 2 years then he would not come back to ask to remove that feedback, he will buy account and run another project and will improve himself so that it is not easily discovered in the other scam project
That's what I've been waiting for.
Even if, in retrospect, it was not morally correct, the mission was not even apparent, the intention behind it was never simply to pull people's money out of their pockets.
Transparency is probably not my strength, but you can believe me or not.
The only other account on Bitcointalk was created on the same day (yieldly or something similar as username) and only because my original user account no longer knew the name. Well, puff cake.
Wasn't right. You don't do that. And I probably won't be so deceptive again.