There's definitely a limit to what kind of conclusions you can draw from my data. Mostly I just thought it was interesting and worth sharing.
But why do you post inconclusive data and draw potentially misleading conclusions, and then hedge with "I thought it was interesting and worth sharing"?
The argument of the GP is that, people are liable to draw the wrong conclusions. So perhaps the fact that the data are "interesting" is actually motivation not to post it.
Transparency > statistical purity
Given the major issue of reproducibility in academic research, I'm not sure "withholding inconclusive data" is a major issue with academic research today.