I believe the problem with scammy ICOs is largely, that it is a lot easier to design a blockchain-based exchange medium like Bitcoin, than to align all the stakeholders’ incentives relevant to a functioning token-based service.
In fact, the latter seems to have an additional dimension of complexity altogether. Like a switch from 3D to 4D.
Most entrepreneurs today were raised in the “platform-model” way of thinking, (which would be 2D), and had a hard time grasping Bitcoin.
Once they got bitcoin, they fail to see how a working business strategy for a token service is, once again, one step up from there, and hence they have a blind spot — a dimension of reality they are not used to taking into account.
I think this is not greed or malice, but rather ignorance, that lies behind the “scammy” ICOs we see.
Have you thought about refining your model of legitimate ICOs, to more accurately reflect the necessary alignment of incentives outside of the blockchain, into the actual business model?
My guess would be that if you did, you wouldn’t find 99% of blockchain business strategies “illegitimate”, but rather 100%. With the notable exception of Ethereum proper, that is.