While true, I think GOG is not ready to accept most games that want to be on their platform and as such needs to select games from the pile to offer. Even Steam has only recently managed to upgrade the amount of games they can add in a year, and it was no doubt already a lot easier for them as it is. I imagine the workload involved and possibly GOG's infrastructure still limits the amount of games they can add to the point they need to make hard choices sometimes. Hence the 'boutique' approach as they call it.

Like toxicTom said Daikatana is a part of a gaming history. But yeah, you've got the point. Personally I don't understand releasing broken games like remastered Eador or Windforge. Sure, they were fixed after some time but there were so buggy GOG should have seen it while playtesting and wait with the release. And even bigger offender - Pixel Piracy. It's not buggy but this game offers so little entertainment and so much frustration that I cannot understand how it got here. Perhaps it was "Shiver me timbers! Sandbox game with pirates? We must have it! Yarr!" kind of decision.

While it wouldn't make much sense for GOG to volunteer that sort of information, developers sometimes do.

GOG does know tho, that's the sole purpose of wishlist. They also have access to sale data and I'm sure they have people analyzing market trends.

That, and showcasing some rejected games would be like saying "See this game? It's not good enough for us". Maybe it would not be the intent, but it would be what most users and any publishers/dev would hear. So it would create bad blood between GOG and their potential business partners. Very unprofessionnal, and VERY unwise. If you publicly shame one of your partners/partners-to-be, everyone will take notice and be relunctant to work with you ever again.

^This. So much this.
---
People who voice the OP's suggestion seem to automatically assume publishing rejection lists would be in the (small indie) devs' interest. IT IS NOT. OP, imagine what would happen to your chances of finding gainful employment if the employers who rejected you posted about your alleged lack of professional skills and/or personal hygiene all over the internets.

not sure why telling games are rejected and why would boost sales...if anything it would get people annoyed that gOg do not release game XYZ for reason YXZ (which they think is silly...) and stop buying here on principle.

So much this, it would be bad if GOG does what the OP suggested, even if just putting up a few games for GoGer to vote on. If GoGer vote for it, then all well and good, if not enough GoGer vote for it, then the game will be potentially killed due to bad PR and new game dev / publisher will be hesitant to brave the bad PR generated by this move.

You can't open that box, take one out, then close the box.

Once opened - then all those folks that don't want to see "every time" but each having their own "this time" would start barking ("why did you tell us about this one and not about that one" / "I heard you rejected [X] and I'd like to know why" / GOG must have a secret they don't want to tell about game [X] - because LOOK they told us about game [Y] but not game [X] / etc. etc)

So your personal "not every time" added into everyone else's "not every time, but this time" ends up equaling "every time".

I can't see how GOG would remotely stand to benefit from doing this at all, but I can see substantial reasons why they would stand to regret doing something like this. All it would be is bait for people to hate them, to give people ammo to disagree with their decisions, or to point out where they didn't apply the same logic to game A as to game B in a particular person or group of people's minds. There's nothing good that could come from it for GOG, and I'm sure that they would think the same thing as well although they'd never likely say it publicly because that would be used as ammo to argue with them about it also.

Lol, great job. I guess you didn't see the date of the OP did you?

Daikatana is awesome!