The problem is that that Kickstarter is really nothing more than distributed venture capital. Except that normal venture capital gives you a share of the company or future profits.
Here's a thought - what if that is OK? What if someone is OK being a venture capitalist whose only return is to possibly get a cool product they would like to see exist?
I think the real "problem" if there is one, is people who think of Kickstarter as a store instead of venture capital with product as a return.
All you get is a promise for a future product.
You don't get that; you get a promise they will *try to create* the product. The work Kickstarter has done in terms of validation and required disclosure is to try and make it as clear as possible, how likely that promise is to be kept.
discontent among users about failed projects
Those users can go take a flying leap as far as I'm concerned. I think there are enough people that understand what Kickstarter is, that it will continue to do well.
treats it as such by letting "investors" buy "shares" of the companies seeking funding thus making it obvious that they are also buying all the risk that comes with that
Sorry but I wouldn't touch that nebulous piece of crap with a ten foot pole. What Kickstarter is now is pretty clear I think, at this point everyone knows Kickstarters can fail, so they know there is risk. The disclosure items at the bottom give a good amount of information to fairly evaluate that risk.