So why not back them themselves?
Such a weird initiative that at the end of the day only feels like a mild endorsement.
Well, if we funded the game, we'd most likely be the primary beneficiary in terms of sales, and likely also keep the IP.
What we're trying to do here is help small teams with visibility, while enabling them to be in control of their own destiny the whole time (because coming through the Indiegogo process, or having us distribute, is entirely the dev's choice). And even if we distribute the game, the developer keeps 90% of the net revenue.
Regarding the endorsement, the only person that can offer guarantees is the developer. They receive the funds raised, and they develop the game. What we're trying to do is provide added reassurance to potential backers that at least somebody who knows what to look for has checked out the team - our support through crowdfunding isn't the answer to all risks around the trust relationship, but we want to try to help that process if possible.
Of course, if people don't want that or see the value, we'll keep watching feedback and make changes accordingly - so thoughts are definitely welcome.