They have a right to do that within the confines of the law. We have a right to analyze their technology and their distribution methodology.

Some investors/speculators may prefer an ICO. Apparently society has some laws about not fooling lunch money investors, but other than adhering to law then I would have no qualms with anyone experimenting with other methods of distribution. I am of the opinion for example that Ethereum specifically located in Switzerland in order to escape SEC regulation, but my IANAL understanding is that is not sufficient and thus they have broken the law by issuing and selling unregistered investment securities to non-accredited USA investors. But again, IANAL, so readers consult your own attorney.

So what I am saying is that I was fairly open minded about Iota. I don't think the technology will solve the centralization issue though. And I don't think a limited distribution ICO can scale persmissionless, decentralized, network effects and thus adoption. But it is not my role to decide for them. I shared my opinion.