Well said. The fact that this isn't the most highly voted answer in this question speaks volumes about the community here.

Then there are those questions that would fall under the good category that just don't seem to receive a whole lot of attention, thus, little voting occurs, and thus, they don't get counted in all these statistical reports that folks like to tout around. In other words, whilst the vote-count is certainly helpful, it's not the end-all-be-all of post quality. I hope that was more clear. :-)

@TheCleaner, No, certainly not. I believe what I was trying to say was that while highly up-voted questions are usually well written and worthwhile, that's not always the case. Voting on the SE sites tends to follow a combination of popularity of the user, timing, social jest, and quality. [continued]

@Iain, if that is all you got out of my post, then I don't believe I made myself very clear. If I have some time, I'll try to be more explicit.

I wouldn't put a whole lot of stock on the voting being synonymous to 'good' questions. The voting aspect to this site is more of a social experiment than a true measure of quality. There's also the volume aspect to consider. With so many questions being posted, visibility of a question goes from seen to forgotten really quickly, which also affects votes, number of answers, etc.

Requiring registration will not change the number of bad questions. You will just be forcing bad users to create bad accounts to ask bad questions.