# Manchester in top 50 cities



## susie12 (Feb 8, 2010)

Manchester is in the list of most 'liveable' cities in the world, and London is not.


----------



## Lo Siento. (Feb 8, 2010)

I loved living in manchester


----------



## spacemonkey (Feb 8, 2010)

Give us the full top 50 then.


----------



## Lo Siento. (Feb 8, 2010)

yeah if Madrid, Leamington Spa and Ipswich are in there, I've got a full set


----------



## susie12 (Feb 8, 2010)

I am trying to post link but it's not working - it is in the Independent anyway.  Vancouver is top.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Feb 8, 2010)

Huh, why is a relative lurker posting something about an article that appeared in the Independent last June?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...make-top-50-most-liveable-cities-1699988.html


----------



## susie12 (Feb 9, 2010)

What is your problem?  Saw it online last night didn't realise it was from last June - as for 'relative lurker' again, what is your problem?

Your comments are rude and uncalled for - not everyone wants to spill their guts all over a load of strangers.


----------



## machine cat (Feb 9, 2010)

uh oh


----------



## futha (Feb 9, 2010)

susie12 said:


> What is your problem?  Saw it online last night didn't realise it was from last June - as for 'relative lurker' again, what is your problem?
> 
> Your comments are rude and uncalled for - not everyone wants to spill their guts all over a load of strangers.



Reverse post count envy. People with high post counts are jealous of people who don't waste their life on here and therefore have low post counts


----------



## Dr_Herbz (Feb 9, 2010)

susie12 said:


> Manchester is in the list of most 'liveable' cities in the world, and London is not.



That's because London is full of wankers... nobody wants to live with wankers


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2010)

susie12 said:


> - not everyone wants to spill their guts all over a load of strangers.



Conversely, I don't mind to spill my load all over a strangers guts


----------



## Lo Siento. (Feb 9, 2010)

that top 20 is filled with some fucking boring places. Including a shit load of cities in Canada and Australia which don't have to deal with the town-planning inconvenience of having existed for 1,000+ years

Any list that includes Frankfurt on the list of best cities is definitely working from a different set of criteria to me.


----------



## kyser_soze (Feb 9, 2010)

This reply caught my vidder:



> UK residents do not have bath daily. Mumbai Indians do. Naples is Dirty very dirty as the PM moves around with naked photos and small children of 5 to 6 follow hi as he dishes out sweets and throws the wrapping , raping , papers a on the streets. The kids stick the gum on the seats of the cars and taxi. UK does not. They stick the gum on the PC to remind them of the D-Day. London was very dirty in 2008 now it is 2009.then we will be in 2010.
> Self-improvement author Dale Carnegie once said, "A person's name is to that person the sweetest and most important sound in any language." No wonder we put it to use any chance we get: from naming a business (Wal-Mart) to naming a child (Ron Jr.). For the same reason, we insist that a hospital auditorium or a park bench carry our name in return for our money.
> 
> We name inventions, diseases, countries, products, plants, mountains, planets, and more after people's names. We even coin words after them. Such words are called eponyms, from epi- (upon) + -onym (name). churrigueresque
> ...





We've got nothing like this poster on here.


----------



## kyser_soze (Feb 9, 2010)

Oh, and yeah, agree with Lo Siento re: Frankfurt's inclusion over London's!


----------



## Lo Siento. (Feb 9, 2010)

kyser_soze said:


> oh, and yeah, agree with lo siento re: Frankfurt's inclusion over london's!



do you like porn and bankers? Yes, i said porn. And bankers!

Then come to beautiful frankfurt: All we have is porn. And bankers!


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Feb 9, 2010)

susie12 said:


> What is your problem?  Saw it online last night didn't realise it was from last June - as for 'relative lurker' again, what is your problem?
> 
> Your comments are rude and uncalled for - not everyone wants to spill their guts all over a load of strangers.


Erm, it's not a problem.  You're projecting.

I was simply confused and curious.

Most people put up a link to recent information.  It just seemed like a weird thing to refer to, randomly out of the blue, with no explanation as to why a really old survey was being referred to, and wasn't asking for any comments or opinions or anything.  

And in the context of someone who rarely posts, again, it seemed curious for someone to think that a really old piece of information was sufficiently newsworthy as to merit comment.

I asked a question as to why an old survey had been referred to, wondering why someone who rarely posts deemed it sufficiently interesting.  And I put a 'confused' smiley there.

If you think that counts as 'rude' then you clearly haven't spent enough time on urban.  I hadn't intended to be rude.  Whereas you clearly have.


----------



## susie12 (Feb 10, 2010)

Not in the slightest.  I was taken aback by the pointless hostility of your comments.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Feb 10, 2010)

susie12 said:


> Not in the slightest.  I was taken aback by the pointless hostility of your comments.


I was puzzled and curious, you're the one who's being hostile and unnecessarily aggressive.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Feb 10, 2010)

You're both dicks, now shut the fuck up.


----------



## Maurice Picarda (Feb 10, 2010)

Susie comes across as slightly less hinged. And the spat is much more interesting than the OP.


----------



## Refused as fuck (Feb 10, 2010)

Cunt.


----------



## susie12 (Feb 11, 2010)

> [/You're both dicks, now shut the fuck up.
> QUOTE]
> 
> fine by me


----------



## machine cat (Feb 11, 2010)

you didn't shut up


----------



## StanSmith (Feb 11, 2010)

Whats a list any way? the wankers at Lonely Planet thinks Wolverhamptom is the 5th worst city in the world. Ok it isnt the best but the 5th worst ffs?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1239478/Wolverhampton-named-fifth-WORST-city-planet.html


----------



## Forum Lout (Feb 17, 2010)

Pen pushing fools.

To gauge what a place is like you need to either live there or visit it regularly.

Wolverhampton ain't that bad. If I was to nominate the worst UK city, Norwich would win with flying colours. It might look nice from the outside but as they say, don't judge a book by it's cover.


----------

