Cryptocurrency was designed to be resistant to law enforcement and allow money to be transferred irrevocably to opaque pseudonyms, and to prevent blacklisting by any central agency. Once fraud happens, you've irrevocably lost the money.

This is a hilariously uninformed statement. Which cryptocurrency?

I'd even argue that the juggernaut BTC was _designed_ to be trackable, and as the recent history shows, law enforcement successfully and multiple times did exactly that when needed - tracked, identified and penalized bad actors.

The leading blockchain tech out there (Algorand) supports both freezing and clawback: https://developer.algorand.org/docs/features/asa/

I think their point is that the holders of the money after ICO can easily get away with doing nothing and just extract the funds. In reality, their payment is not tied to the interest of the coin holders, legally, or for the sake of their reputation. They can be anonymous.

The ICO ecosystem was expressly designed to help liquidate illiquid positions created by the super-massive eth premine without collapsing the market.

I suppose you're right that there wasn't any requirement for that design for the ICOs to be scams, there just wasn't any particular need for them to not be scams.

Virtually all (actually all?) ICOs themselves have been designed to have scam friendly terms-- e.g. no real ownership or control for the buyers, no accountability for the sellers, and little to no transparency. Even the least scammy of the ICOs have some term or another that effectively enables their issuers to just walk off with the funds with no recourse in the contract.

The phrase "by design" can be used emphatically and/or to mean in effect. Or at least that's how I also use it. Intetstingly, according to Webster's 1913 I'm using the word emphatically in an obsolete fashion.