A good point Samira, it's why I cull crowd shots very carefully.
But at some point, when I'm pushing the button to fast, I notice battery heat/weakness resulting in shutter lag. Am I just carrying less power than everyone else, or what?

"If you are in a "for hire" situation, then I suggest providing all the shots- if not for "public consumption" then at least to the person who paid you money. In those situations the subject might have something in particular they are looking for, maybe a portion of a picture they can use. In a for hire scenario it's not the photographer's job to censor."

I should specify the type of situation I weed out a lot of photos. When I am shooting at an event such as a hafla or performance and a dancer has not specifically hired me to photograph them (but the event has asked me to be there) and I'm posting pics to a website where dancers can choose to buy photos of themselves or not, then I do a lot of weeding. I only want to put the best stuff up there because I don't want to have too much for everyone to wade through to get to their own pics and it also serves as advertising for me, so hopefully, some of them will hire me for photo shoots or events.

When it is a photo shoot someone has hired me for, I do less weeding but I still do some. I do keep in mind that they want options to choose from and could be looking for specific things but if a picture makes them look particularly unattractive or is fundamentally flawed in some way (such as too blurry), I delete it. This could be a holdover from my wedding photography days when the photographer I worked for said, "If the bride looks bad in any pic, delete it. It doesn't matter if everyone else looks fabulous. It's all about the bride." ^_^ My comment in an earlier post about "give them 5 great photos instead of 5 great within 50 mediocre" doesn't apply to hour photo shoots, I do give them a lot more than 5 photos to choose from.

Samira sez: "In a for hire scenario it's not the photographer's job to censor."

That may or not be true contractually, depending on any prior agreement between the client and the photographer. But I like to think that a good photographer brings a level of objective discernment to the decision process. Just as a talented artist may understand a slew of subliminal design devices that the layperson may be totally unawares of (yet nonetheless dramatically impact the effectiveness of the work), a qualified photographer can look beyond self-conscious quirks of taste that the subject may have (so many subjects bring unrelated personal luggage into the edit process) and guide towards the best product. Providing the option of "outtakes" opens up the very real possibility of less-than-quality work being used. Granted, not all shutter pushers are up to the task of picture editing (as evidenced by the sloppy galleries so many photogs opt to share with the world) but hopefully that's the exception and not the rule.

Perhaps an apt comparison might be the idea: "In a for hire scenario it's not the dancer's job to censor." I doubt many performer's would allow the client to make their creative choices. While they may hire a performer for a certain style of dance, would a professional dancer allow the client to go in and change chunks of the choreography? Instead, I imagine, most good dancers would politely suggest that the client liked their work enough to hire the dancer; now respect the dancer's choices.