One thing I have noticed is that nobody here is using their real names. That is the nature of the bitcointalk culture and it's unreasonable to ask the developers to do so. As for escrow, the intention is not to develop a program, deliver it, then collect the funds as our reward. The intention is to spend the money developing the project. We can't do that if its escrowed. Also, there's a list I've seen somewhere on bitcointalk giving a list of trusted escrows, and none of them that I recall were using their real names.
But it's your BTC to fund or not to fund, and if one of your criteria for doing so is "real names or escrow" then you cannot invest in this coin.
I get that entirely. If I was running a coin here, I wouldn't want to give my real name either. Too many crazies involved with crypto. But I also hold the opinion once you start asking folks for money, you should give them something... be it your real name, escrow, or at the least, one of those coin dev verification services (if they even still do that).
And even those aren't definite criteria for me investing in a coin. I've taken part in smaller ICOs where the devs didn't provide a whole lot of info. But it wasn't like here. Here it's like pulling teeth to even get the lead (or 3rd lead dev) to even respond with any info. And then we get vague answers back. Hence why it'd be nice if they were a little more forthcoming about themselves.
Ex: Okay, Lannister said he's a doctoral student in electrical and computer engineering. That's fine. Maybe a brief resume of projects he's worked on would have been nice. Or coding languages he knows. And why hasn't he taken part here in the discussion about the technical aspects of the coin?
" but for what I read, even boinc, folding@home or any other project work with redundant workunits which are computed several times from different members and then results are checked, right? so... did you found the way to achieve this? 
