Full disclosure: I've been helping to edit the Casino Critique website, and although I'm not part of their team I am involved in this, and therefore my reputation now that I've announced it.  I'm not fact-checking, just editing for grammar and the like.

IMO making a big deal out of who's behind the official CC account is a waste of mental energy, because as I said previously the team members (in other words, the people who'd have their feet under the fire if the project turned out to be a scam) have made their identities known.  If you're going to focus on anything, it ought to be who has control over any funds CC has received so far--and I don't have an answer to that.  To my understanding, no decisions are going to be made about use of funds without the 2-of-3 sig security thing in action, so if you're already starting to point fingers, the targets of said fingers are already there.

Also: I happen to believe that there's no intent to scam investors with the CC project.  I think the members behind it really do want to create a casino review site that's going to succeed.  That said, I do understand the skepticism by OP and others (though I think it's overblown given that the team members are listed by name on the CC website).  This isn't exactly like that case we had a while back where some relatively trusted members misused charity funds.  This a group of forum members whose reputations are worth something to them and likely worth more in potential or actual money than they could get by pulling off a scam by colluding to pull in investment money for a fake casino review site.

I've been wrong before, but my gut and my experience is telling me I'm right on this one.