I don't think such criticism is fair: the site is what it is, and there are as many different photographer mindsets as there are readers/viewers of LuLa. You can't very well run a website on a daily measuring paradigm where you have to balance carefully the differing expectations of the visitors.
I think that, overall, LuLa does a damned good job of covering most of the bases.
The site is far from confined to 'landscape', thank goodness, or many people would pack their carpet bag and thumb a ride elsewhere. You simply can't limit interest to such a narrow vision; if you do, you starve it (the site) of a degree of cross-pollination that lets it grow and attract a wider, and thus larger, membership. Think for a moment: much of the technical information that comes into the site is from practising professionals in commercial, advertising disciplines. Few of these guys appears to have an overwhelming thirst for landscape, but the technical expertise some share from the goodness of their hearts is useful to all photographers hoping to improve their standards a bit...
It certainly wouldn't make LuLa blink, but were it otherwise and all I found here was another rock, another tree, another berg, I'd be long gone. Perhaps I wouldn't find another regular place to think of as a second, spiritual home, but the Internet is plenty wide enough to keep my mind and surfing instinct fairly well occupied nonetheless.
If it ain't broke...
Rob C