In my own recording experiences, I don't know that I've ever tried to make something sound crappier, but I have run into a lot of situations where I just wasn't all that concerned with waiting until I could get into a studio, and I wanted to get the song down. Once I had recorded on whatever equipment I had available, I realized the song had enough of a drive and power that I didn't really have a need to rerecord it later. And I've had studio recordings that have actually lost a great deal of raw power when compared to the 4 track demos. But that's probably as much due to lack of ability in a studio as anything else. And pretty much my entire rock and roll life has been strictly for kicks, so when you introduce a desire to actually make something of yourself, lol, these fidelty issues might come into play.
That being said, I think it's all pretty subjective. There's plenty of great bands that I can't even imagine the Steely Dan version of, Guitar Wolf being one. All I ask from a recording is that I can hear the individual instruments, but past that, I'm looking more at the song itself than any particular fidelity.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's not so much that I enjoy lo-fi recordings, it's that it doesn't cause me to judge the recording one way or the other. Lo-fi is something that I tend to treat like a extra grungy guitar sound or distorted drums or anything else you play around with when recording to try to make a unique sound.