I've come across many complaints on the internet regarding this. Are they relevant? I don't think so, and here's why:
I'm not brave enough to claim that I can always distinguish between a bad and a good photo. When I browse through the Magnum gallery, some photos evoke a physical revulsion in me. However, that doesn't make them inherently bad; it simply means that I may not like or understand them. Gurushots' photo selections might not be as meticulous as Magnum's, but similarly, I wouldn't argue that a particular winning photo is bad just because I don't personally like it.
Gurushots voting is carried out by us, the photographers. Each one of us is an artist with a unique personality. However, collectively, we form an inconsistent blob of opinions. Psychologists suggest that the level of collective thinking decreases compared to the individual levels of each person. For example, if our average age is 40, our collective voting might drop to a 5-year-old level. So, we tend to choose kittens and robins, but this isn't a Gurushots issue.
Instead of complaining that a winning photo is bad, I try to understand why it is considered better than mine.