I've had enough of Onexposure (www.1x.com and http://1x.com/member/17030/balazs-pataki). For a year, this site was my bread and butter but eventually I got tired of rejections. You know, to publish a photograph there it first goes through screening, and... well, theoretically I'd say "if it's good enough, it will be published" but I no longer understand what's considered "good" there. The smallest common denominator of published images is that they are nice and sharp. So far so good, but I paid 99 $ a year to see my photos rejected, and now it seems that I'm a masochist who's willingly paying for getting frustrated. True, you get a homepage for your bucks but - and this is why I'll cancel my membership - you can have much better hosting service for much less elsewhere. They have an excellent Critique channel though which is probably the best on the net for feedback on your shots, but I don't believe in the use of photo critique any longer. It's always the "crop here, darken there, sharpen overthere" bullshit. One could use a critique-generator and it would be as useful as it gets. This equally applies to the critiques I write. It just doesn't make sense.
Anyway, my own site is under preparation now, in the meantime I made an experiment. I posted the same image to photo.net, photosig, deviantart, fotocommunity and two Hungarian sites, just to compare the feedback received.