The World's 100 Best Cities in 2018 (malls, nightlife, beaches)
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.
Wow, I just learned that a city with the largest historic center, some of the greatest art museums and cultural institutions, one of the most beautiful metro systems, and one of the most magnificent settings of any city in the world is actually a "fraud". I feel so enlightened.
Oh come on!! Vegas is good, but it isn't THAT good!
They needed to make space for heavyweights like Providence, Salt Lake City, Edmonton and Bristol.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL ... This is the best thread I've read on City-Data in a long time and - for once - some responders have a sense of humor. I had similar thoughts about Providence too. I'll bet Worcester (MA) and Springfield (MA) feel cheated!
Honestly, I take Casablanca Morocco for one example over a vast majority of recent mainland Europe catastrophes suddenly severely jeopardizing their own nightlife venues. Another story literally just one year to decade ago in experience. Dishonorable obnoxious rental property owners closing everything up without motives. Can anyone tell me if there are other Ibiza vibrant stars remaining in mainland Europe? Of course I have endless respectful mindfulness on equal preference to tons of the Continent, yet there are tones of disappointing reaction. Couldn’t believe how easy adequate enough these professional business services are upholding over there that well. Outside sterile efficiency types of matters yet evenly practical to the entire picture. Harmoniously combining variable natural forces.
the list is not a personal reflection of my viewpoints. Just want to point that out right from the start.
Yes it is. The selection of criteria and the weighting of them (or rather the absence of weighting) reflects your personal viewpoint. For example, you chose to use diversity as a metric. Personal choice. Weather, nightlife. Facebook checkins.
Dubai in the top 10?............clearly they only interviewed men.
Well one can live the Western lifestyle there. It due to the high number of international professionals living and working there and there is many of them single and young as well. Also alcohol is legal there as well, (in hotels only). Hotels don't really care less if a couple is married or not sharing a bed.. Also Dubai has a packed underground gay scene as well. I even know an married woman that has no issues with her hooking up with different men over there.
Part of the problem with lists isn't actually the lists themselves. It's the words we choose to describe them.
A word like "best" only makes sense when 2 other pieces of information are explicitly understood:
1. The single criterion in which it scores highest.
2. The audience that values that criterion.
When trying to assign the notion of 'best' to a list that emerges from multiple criteria, it becomes convoluted to the point of being useless.
For example, when talking about 'diversity', not everyone cares about it. Some even prefer less, rather than more, diversity. So in a list such as this, elevating some cities over others with this criterion as part of the calculation becomes useless to everyone who prefers the polar-opposite of the 'value' given to such a consideration.
The other thing to note on this point is that 'best' is a poor way to represent such a list. Better descriptors include "Highest ranking", because that's literally what it is: a ranking along a continuum, where one end of the continuum is 'lowest' and the other is 'highest'. Some criteria are intuitive when ranked this way, like 'crime rate' or 'population'. They're objective measures that are meaningful regardless one's personal preferences.
And, on the note of personal preferences, I think lists like this would be better shared by pointing to a web page where a person is free to choose, say, their top 3 criteria of interest and to rank those criteria for themselves. Then, let the list re-sort according to those 3 chosen criteria. At least a person could then say, "You know what? I'm not like a lot of people I know because when I'm looking for a place that suits me best, I want a place with the cleanest air, the most temperate weather, and that's got a lot of local cultural flair (museums, festivals, preservation of architecture, etc.).
All that said, I can appreciate the work that went into ranking the several criteria to produce this list but, for me (and for many others, judging by the comments), I think the general consensus is that lists like this are just a way for data-geeks (myself included) to pass the time crunching numbers
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.