Depends what you travel for I guess. LP is obv interesting to the traveller interested in different cultures but cultural tourism is one of the few things I'm not interested in. The three big things I travel for are nightlife, natural beauty and food/wine. Also some interest in sport and culture but of a western variety (that is, I like it if a place has a good theatre/music scene but I want it to be in English). The food in LP was interesting but not spectacular and it didn't really tick any of the other boxes.

^^^ LP most definitely has natural beauty.

Why would anyone want to visit this ****ty city ?

im gonna go with cairo or san jose, costa rica

true it does have that but other than that it is one big tourist trap filled with dumb westerners

Touring through Eurolands, Marseille's the worst I've come across. The region's pretty nice but the actual city hasn't got much to offer, plus it ****in stinks.

During my stay in Thailand I went to renew my visa in Malaysia once, and picked the closest and easiest option for me at that time which was Kota Bharu. It's located in the far north, only a short distance from the border, muslim region. At my time of visiting (end of '09) there had just been a bombing in a McDonalds in Hat Yai (Thailand - near border) due to religious conflicts, so on my way there I came across several roadblocks with armed guards etc. No further difficulties, all in all very friendly people. However, it was such a difference from Thailand coming there, dead atmosphere overall, more industrialized and everything. On a sidenote; Malaysia's got their own car brands, I remember there being a huge Photon/Proton or something alike factory over there. Now I don't mind places with fewer to zero tourists around (which was the case here), but there was literally nothing to do/see there + nothing going on. Seeing how 2+2 travel's filled with posts on Thailand I can imagine lots of y'all being there, would recommend any of you to pick a different city to renew your visa to be able to make something out of the trip.

Both excellent choices... I think I would actually rate San Jose worse than Santo Domingo.

Marseille.

But 30km away from that ****hole are some of the most amazing beaches/calanques in Europe.

So much hate for Marseille.
Now I MUST visit it.

Been to 35 countries..

Manchester would have to be up there.

lol @ those saying LA, London, Paris, Seattle, etc etc... there are things you might dislike about those places, but each one of them is quite interesting to a lot of people.

Worst kind of city = bad weather, high crime, terrible food, dull people, general ugliness, nothing much to do, and not far from places that are far better. That's why Manchester is up there for me.

I do agree also with Naples, Detroit, Marseilles, etc... not great cities at all.

Not hard to figure out why Gary sucks. Check the demographics for that city.

What do Gary, Indiana, Ghana, Nigeria, and Crafty Cockney's avatar have in common?

Note: Tulsa, Oklahoma is also the armpit of the world, but for different reasons.

Agree.

I listed KL, but i would much rather live there than most places in the UK

Hull, Manchester, Birmingham and also London, which qualifies for all the things you listed apart from "being not far from places that are better" because it has the airports.

and i was the only one who said paris i think and we were just talking about beggars at the time

i think overall it is one of the best cities i have been to

but back to the worst ones...

Same for Dublin minus the Muslims

sydney