So "backing up" an NFT project is not such a good move?
It depends.
It's a contract. That is the deal you are "transacting". You own it.
The proof of ownership asset, such as a picture etc... may or may not even be provided with Ip rights.
It may just serve as a digital artifact providing visual representation of contract ownership.
Bore Ape Yacht club is a good example of properly providing IP rights IMHO.
If you do have IP rights... do you have guaranteed access to the artifact that the metadata of the contract refers too?
If the URL is on the regular web, hosted by others this becomes less reliable.
If it is saved on the chain (again as is the case with BAYC) this is most reliable, but is more costly and in of itself, less flexible for interactive elements.
If it is stored on IPFS or Freenet, then access to it is distributed which removed a single point of removal,
HOWEVER, the files' longevity on the network relies on
1) popularity or
2)manual "pinning".
This can be easily done manually by joining the network after NFT purchase and hosting your own pin, but few who buy NFTs for "the art or club" might think of this.
Sans personal pinning, if the original minter then stops pinning the file, or it is removed from the network due to lack of attention, again you may lose you visual proof of transaction.
Aside from the contract, the metadata and the digital artifact...
Is the roadmap merely promises or a physically contractual relationship with the token holders?
20s and 721s are rarely by themselves able to do this.
1155s or combinations of contracts under one transactional umbrella can be linked to bind a roadmap together.
If the roadmap is a work in progress, is it community backed* or prefunded from a code locked liquidity pool?
DAOs* are often associated with this process on a block chained, contractual coin basis, in a formal, distributed participatory form.
That covers my objective outlook on the "Fund"amentals
...
Now the subjective...
Trading and speculation... None of the above may apply.
