Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I read you whole post, I am failing to understand what part of your post acts as evidence that people didn't misunderstand the question. You clearly haven't been reading the thread.
It seems like you are very proud that Minneapolis won the poll. Good for you. But like I was saying to the other guy if you want to make the claim that it is still superior than every one of these cities even with surroundings and distance taken into consideration go right ahead instead of stalling.
Nobody is stalling. You just don't like the result you saw. Of these cities, the majority of voters (including me) voted for Minneapolis. Make another poll if you don't like the results of this one. Good day, sir.
You do seem a bit upset that Minneapolis is leading in the voting. If you didn't want and/or expect that result, you probably shouldn't have included it in the poll. Particularly given that it was a "stretch" to even define Minneapolis as a big city.
Here's your original question:
You ask which city is best for nature scenery/activities. You then make reference to "around the city" and "surroundings by distance". These are very imprecise criteria, and will be interpreted differently by those who assess them.
You mentioned in one of your posts that you didn't feel that the voting results matched what posters were saying. I wouldn't expect them to! Only about half of the people voting have contributed a post to the thread, and it is common for such threads to be dominated by the posts of those who disagree with the majority position.
I voted a long time ago. This is my first post to the thread. I suspect that for many, such as myself, we considered our vote to be an obvious one, which didn't require a post to expound upon or justify itself.
You have a city which has received a strong plurality of the votes cast. So, at least in the collective opinion of those who have voted, you have an answer to your original post.
Or it could just be that most people have nothing to add to the topic because they don't know very much about these places and just voted based on Minneapolis commonly referred to as an outdoor city. Because let's face it, anybody could click 2 times and vote. It's what telling us reasons that one actually has to be knowledgeable about.
Your whole post kind of sums up the whole thing. For a choice that is so "obvious" you failed to tell us even one reason in that whole post as to why it's so obviously superior to the others and gave us a "lolz what do you know, most people voted Minneapolis, so it obviously wins!" level response.
And to make it worse instead of giving any examples, what you do is accuse me of being upset over Minneapolis winning the poll and try to make this thread about that. Well accuse away, but given your location I don't think it holds any merit.
Nobody is stalling. You just don't like the result you saw. Of these cities, the majority of voters (including me) voted for Minneapolis. Make another poll if you don't like the results of this one. Good day, sir.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yyuusr
Your whole post kind of sums up the whole thing. For a choice that is so "obvious" you failed to tell us even one reason as to why it's so obviously superior to the other and gave us a "lolz what do you know, most people voted Minneapolis, so it obviously wins!" level response.
And to make it worse instead of giving any examples, what you do is accuse me of being upset over Minneapolis winning the poll as your argument and try to make this thread about that. Well accuse away, but given your location I don't think it holds any merit.
I guess it was kind of obvious this was eventually going to turn into you argument as well. For people that like to keep pointing out Minneapolis is the victor in this thread, you guys sure seem hesitant to make the claim that you think it has better or at least has more when places outside the city limits are taken into consideration. If you are not stalling then you are just scared to say it, because you know you would have to tell us why.
I don't need to create another thread, I can actually read threads. I am aware of what people who actually know what they are talking about have been saying. I'd say their opinions hold more merit than people who can only just make 2 clicks with the mouse of their computer and can't add anything when people ask them why.
I guess it was kind of obvious this was eventually going to turn into you argument as well. For people that like to keep pointing out Minneapolis is the victor in this thread, you guys sure seem hesitant to make the claim that you think it has better or at least has more when places outside the city limits are taken into consideration. If you are not stalling then you are just scared to say it, because you know you would have to tell us why.
I don't need to create another thread, I can actually read threads. I am aware of what people who actually know what they are talking about have been saying. I'd say their opinions hold more merit than people who can only just make 2 clicks with the mouse of their computer and can't add anything when people ask them why.
You really should take lakal's advice and start another thread. You can rig it to get whatever outcome you want.
Here are some possibilities:
"Which city, that has a United Nations headquarters, has the best...."
"Which city, with an NFL team that used to be coached by Mike Ditka, is the most..."
"Which city, that doesn't start with the letter 'M', is ..."
There are a lot ways you could proceed--all of them much better than starting a poll; and then insulting respondents by telling them that they are stupid and/or lazy because you are dissatisfied with the results of your own poll.
I read the whole thread but it was months ago. In any case, I can see people favoring Minneapolis if they're ok with relatively gentle topography and no ocean. It's in a less developed region and sounds like it has ample forests and lakes and larger trail system. I'd weight dramatic scenery more, which is why I chose Boston. Though it's stretch to call all but a few places in the Northeast dramatic, but parts of northern New England are probably about as good as it gets.
By more dramatic you mean height and not beauty right? Because from what little experience I have with mountains/hills in NE the Hudson River Valley was better than a lot of tall yet brown mountain I saw in the WC (PAC NW not included). They might be tall but that aint very pretty. The Hudson River Valley was more pleasing to the eyes. Some of the one I saw upstate may have just been even more gorgeous.
You really should take lakal's advice and start another thread. You can rig it to get whatever outcome you want.
Here are some possibilities:
"Which city, that has a United Nations headquarters, has the best...."
"Which city, with an NFL team that used to be coached by Mike Ditka, is the most..."
"Which city, that doesn't start with the letter 'M', is ..."
There are a lot ways you could proceed--all of them much better than starting a poll; and then insulting respondents by telling them that they are stupid and/or lazy because you are dissatisfied with the results of your own poll.
The best of luck to you!
In that whole trolling and spamming post you still failed to give us any reasons to back up your claim. I'm not calling you stupid, but I am saying you don't really know very much about the other cities and are pretending like you do.
Since, you are so jumping for joy so much over Minneapolis winning a poll and we are giving advice now, maybe you should PM all the people who voted Minneapolis telling how much you love them:
"midwest1, thank you for voting Minneapolis, you are the best!"
"Grizzly Addams, thank you for voting Minneapolis, you're awesome!"
"lakal, thank you for voting Minneapolis, I love you!"
It will be time better spent as you might actually make them happy. Because you are really not adding anything of relevance here.
I read the whole thread but it was months ago. In any case, I can see people favoring Minneapolis if they're ok with relatively gentle topography and no ocean. It's in a less developed region and sounds like it has ample forests and lakes and larger trail system. I'd weight dramatic scenery more, which is why I chose Boston. Though it's stretch to call all but a few places in the Northeast dramatic, but parts of northern New England are probably about as good as it gets.
Boston would easily be my second choice. I lived not too far from The Fens, which is some of the most beautiful urban parkland on The East Coast. I used to drive frequently to Montreal, and I was always mesmerized by the scenery along the way.
Or it could just be that most people have nothing to add to the topic because they don't know very much about these places and just voted based on Minneapolis commonly referred to as an outdoor city. Because let's face it, anybody could click 2 times and vote. It's what telling us reasons that one actually has to be knowledgeable about.
Minneapolis is pretty good city wise but I don't think it can beat the EC cities when surroundings are considered. Boston, NYC, DC should all be above it. What is really baffling me is how Chicago has so many votes. It should absolutely be the last here even after Detroit.
I am not looking for a specific result, I said the poll results don't match up to what people actually said about their surroundings in this thread. But I am sensing you still want the answer to be Minneapolis if the surroundings and distance are taken into consideration. If you are meaning to say that just go ahead and say it instead of stalling.
Which has more relevance: regional surroundings (I.e.>50 miles) or city/metro! Let's start with that.
Which has more relevance: regional surroundings (I.e.>50 miles) or city/metro! Let's start with that.
What's ur vote btw?
P.s. I gave examples of things beyond the metro.
Let's start with what exactly you mean by "relevance" first.
What I am asking you to consider? Anything that is personally feasible to you in a day trip and maybe even a weekend trip. Now if you are somebody that seriously finds it that hard to go outside of even the Minneapolis city limits I guess you picked the right place.
My vote? I haven't decided yet. I don't know enough about all these cities surroundings outside their city limits to decide on one. From what I have been hearing from people that actually seem to know all these cities though is that the east coast cities have more than Minneapolis if surroundings are considered. If you want to dispute that and tell us how Minneapolis surroundings > NE surroundings, like I have been saying go right ahead. I'm usually always open to new info I don't know about of cities.
Last edited by yyuusr; 01-20-2014 at 04:28 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
