A day late:
Would You Rather
You will have a car at your disposal in either case, and so would be able to visit nearby areas by driving.
Posted by James at July 17, 2007 2:33 AMThe first.
I've been to athens and london. And while I liked then I'm not really a city person so I wouldn't prefer to stay in a city for 3 weeks.
If I could use the car and go from B&B to B&B around the country I might choose 3 weeks. But in Greece there are really cool islands so the car wouldn't help too much.
Still all 3 of those places don't hold a ton of appeal to me so I'll stick with 1 week each.
If it was italy or ireland or Australia or something I'd probably take the 3 weeks :)
Posted by: jay at July 17, 2007 7:26 AMI'd take London for 3 weeks. there's enough within driving distance to keep me busy outside the city and tons to do in it. I'd love to see Athens/Greece too but have no desire to go anywhere near Japan.
Posted by: B.O.B. (bob) at July 17, 2007 8:00 AMI'll take the 3 places for 1 week each.
I'm sure after a round or two of debauchery I'll be asked to leave the country. Except London, they love shenanigans, hoodlumocity and hooliganary.
Posted by: Derek at July 17, 2007 8:20 AMThree places in three weeks. This will give me a chance to sample each and then if I really liked one of those places, I can go back later. I'd rather that than a random die roll choosing where I go for three weeks. :)
Posted by: Julie at July 17, 2007 8:26 AMHmmm. Toughie.
I haven't been to any of those cities yet. And while a week is just long enough to feel like I've gotten to know a city a three week stay in one of them would be luxurious.
I think it depends on whether I've experienced any of them yet. Right now I'd lean towards seeing them all and crossing them off my list. Maybe I'd shave a few days off Athens and add them to Tokyo.
Posted by: Mike at July 17, 2007 8:41 AMWho's paying for this trip?
Posted by: David Grenier at July 17, 2007 9:31 AMOK I missed the random die roll part. I still think I'd take the 3 weeks. I'd rather have the time to really see things than to rush around trying cram everything into one week. Plus travelling from country to country 3 times would likely not be very relaxing. I'll just have to take my chances on the die roll that it comes up London or Athens.
Mike, I'll trade you my Tokyo sayd for your Athens days!
Posted by: B.O.B. (bob) at July 17, 2007 10:26 AMI'll go with the 3 weeks. I'd like to see all of these places and want the time to savor, enjoy, and digest. Like B.O.B. I'd feel like I had to cram if I only had a week.
Posted by: briwei at July 17, 2007 11:39 AM3 different places for 1 week each, because I liked London and the parts of southern England that I've seen -but 3 weeks is probably too much. And because I've not been to either of the other 2 countries.
Posted by: sharon at July 17, 2007 12:52 PMI'd take the week each, I don't want to risk getting stuck in Tokyo for three weeks. I wouldn't mind visiting Tokyo, but I don't want to be there for three weeks.
Can I trade the car for a transit pass?
Posted by: woneffe at July 18, 2007 11:29 PMYes, we can arrange that trade.
Posted by: James at July 19, 2007 8:37 AM