the rule of thumb of photography is to correct any tilt present to the HORIZON first. the whole world can be upside down but you know that the first thing one subconsciously looks for is the horizon.
which is why pcpsk59's correction is as good as no correction after all - at first i thought i was looking at the original image that he was commenting on, then i realised that it was the image he had edited. this is because i cannot seem to view the ts' original image, btw.
why is there this problem? first off, maybe the hut is not built properly already. second, maybe the hut is at an angle to the horizon, if the horizontal in the hut is not parallel it could be at an angle to the horizon and not running parallel to it based on the direction if you are facing. and it is relatively close to you so this is not resolved. think about it, if you have a river bank near to you, but it is coming towards you, it will appear to be slanted, even though it should be straight. same for running away from you. this is called horizontal perspective problem. based on ts' posted corrected image in #10, this would appear to be the problem assuming that the hut was built correctly. there does not seem to be any vertical perspective problem though (due to your camera back not being entirely vertical too, here it is either ok in the first place, or corrected already.
this is after rotation of 0.6 degrees anticlockwise, btw. before that horizon still slanted. after rotation you realise that the path leading to hut seems to be slanting downwards - this is consistent with the hut coming closer to the vantage point of the photographer, else it should be slanted up, if i'm not wrong. it is a little late over here so i might have trouble visualisation, it's definitely one of the two though.
with the brief technicalities resolved, the composition of the picture, in #10 at least, i do not like. it seems as if the ts wants to take a "graphic approach" where the stark shapes stand out against a background. but there is not enough background, not enough space here. a less tight perspective- i.e. something wider would definitely be more suitable with this end result in mind.
all the processing suggestions here also do not seem to maximize the idea, the whites are not "clean" enough.
this is what i saw and i thought it would be more appropriate