Sure, results need to be published. The problem is that the cart is put before the horse: we decide to publish the results, and where to publish, before we have an inkling of what the results will be.
I'm not necessarily sure this is the cart before the horse.
Deciding to publish the results can just as easily be restated as "Come up with an experiment with a clear and precise scope"
Where to publish is often determining what audience and what questions to ask. For example, targeting a clinical journal means proofs and analytical results may be less compelling, while a simulation of a study might be of active interest.
Both of those help narrow the scope of "All possible interesting questions" to something tractable.
