No. Particularly, failed experiments are very rarely reported in publications.
When one reads a scientific publication, results may seem straight forward and simple. Easy chemistry. Actually, this "easy" chemistry is often the product of several months of struggle in the lab to get the reactions to work properly, the stuff to finally crystallise after hundreds of trials... It is highly frustrating sometimes.
In the case where you just can't get a reaction to work, there is nothing to be published. Publishing failed experiments is not rewarding, so people don't do it.
Sometimes, you get unexpected results that do not fit with your research theme. They may be interesting data, but they don't get published because they are incomplete. For example, I work in crystal engineering. Regularly, you solve crystal structures which are completely different from what you expect. Interesting, yes, but so much off from everything else we do that those structures go to sleep in a draw, waiting to be used in the future, maybe...
what would encourage you to report what you do in lab to an online community?
I don't know.
Publications are important for academical career but you can't publish half finished results.
And it takes a lot of effort to write a paper, so it is not always worth it with weak data.
unavoidably, there is always some left over stuff that stay unpublished.