The system being broken by design doesn't absolve anyone acting within it from the responsibility of their actions. No one is forcing anyone to game the system as effectively as possible to the detriment of the majority. Acknowledging the system itself is fundamentally broken is pointing out that its design rewards bad actors; bad actors are still acting badly and are responsible for those actions.

But you don't need to misuse language to assign responsibility.

What? I am interested... How else would you assign the responsibility to people that designed something intentionally bad, if you cannot used language?

"Misuse [of] language" is a concept I cannot even begin to wrap my head around...

Do I loose the warranty if I use language in unintended ways?

It is their responsibility for breaking the system.

You just 'misused' language to assign responsibility to people for breaking the system.

Saying the system was always designed for this removes responsibility.

No? Responsibility is not a binary concept. Someone can kill someone else, and would be responsible for that death, and the people around that killer could also share responsibility for not noticeing their unusual behavior. And the system could also be responsible for not giving the killer the support they needed, which drove them to kill someone. And the people that designed or constructed that system could also be responsible for not caring enough about these kinds of deaths to prevent them systemically.