"Bad, unfinished, lacking In" this evaluation is completely subjective, so something that is bad for you is good for the artist that made it, something that may be unfinished to you may be finished for the artist that made it, and something that lacks some other thing for you may be complete for the artist that made it.
IMO a gallery is a gallery, where things are showed off, and the only person that can judge if something can be published is the very same artist that did that thing, who is the one that is going to judge when something is good or is bad?
Also something can be bad for an experienced artist but good for a newbie.
IMO an artist is someone that creates something, not someone with a master degree in aaaaaall the theory of painting, photography, etc... Anyone could be an artist, and it's our very own task to decide if something is art for us or not, if you know ARCO, for me 99% of that is crap, but a lot of people think that it's art and pays a lot of money for that art, who am I to judge if the things in ARCO are art or crap for anyone else than me?
All the names you used to substitute the word gallery are synonym to the word gallery, a gallery is just that, this is not the gallery of perfection, who is going to be a judge for perfection? If you enlist in a contest you are to be judged by someone else, but in a public gallery? You are going to be judged by people that see your work in the gallery, and if it's bad people will say that or will shut up, but you decide if you want to be judged, no other person that decides if you work is going to be shown in the gallery or not.
In literature there are a lot of interpretations of different pieces, I happened to know a very important writer (now deceased) of theater and at the same time I had to study him in the school, one day I asked him for the things the "experts" said about one of his pieces in my school book, you know what he said me? "Let them think whatever they want, they don't know what I wanted to express when I wrote that", and IMO this is it, only the artist can truly judge it's piece, no matter if it's good or bad for us, if you don't like it, say so or shut up, if you like it, say so or shut up,but don't try to censore anyone (even when that word sounds hard that is what you are asking for).
And if newbies seek for attention, why is that so wrong? There are people that don't have the luck to have other people around them with any knowledge or interest in what they do, so they post and talk in places where other people with the same interest is going to be, not always things are done to get credit, maybe they publish just to talk, or maybe to improve or for any other reason, again, if you don't like it, ,why censor it? Just ignore it :)
And finally to Rawalanche, there are persons that just want to show off things for the very own reason of showing off things, they don't want criticism (even when they can be greatful for it) they don't want clients (because maybe they don't work on this) and they don't want to improve their picece(maybe because they don't have time to do that), and they publish just for the shake of publishing, and if someone likes their piece, they are happy with it :) not always a reason is needed to do something, and while we can think the same for our own work (which I do and it's why I published just one project, to get criticism and improve the next one) not everyone has to think the same way we do :)
Cheers.
