4 ms·
This thread is full of "I left SF 1,000 years ago, it's awful! I know, because I haven't lived there in 1,000 years!" and "I'll never move to SF, this is why
by roflyear 4y ago
This thread is full of
"I left SF 1,000 years ago, it's awful! I know, because I haven't lived there in 1,000 years!"
and
"I'll never move to SF, this is why! I know it's awful, because of the news!"
Not saying SF doesn't have problems. I don't live there, so I don't know! I do know that I live next to some cities that have similar or worse reputations, and I also know those reputations are overplayed.
- oh_sigh 4y agoYou have to ask yourself - why would SF get this reputation among all possible cities, for no reason at all? A lot of people have fun anecdotes about visiting San Francisco. For example, I was in SF for 3 days and was chased by a man with a knife in a park near a major tourist attraction. I lived in NYC for 12 years and nothing of that sort happened my entire time there. Maybe SF is unique in the dangers are equally dispersed among residents, non residents, and across neighborhoods of varied socio-economic status. Chicago is reputationally dangerous, but the violence is really limited to non-tourist neighborhoods that mostly poor people live in. So probably not the type of people who will be posting stories on HN, or get a CNN article written about them when they die.
- roflyear 4y ago> You have to ask yourself - why would SF get this reputation among all possible cities, for no reason at all? This isn't an argument. > A lot of people have fun anecdotes about visiting San Francisco. Also not an argument. > For example, I was in SF for 3 days and was chased by a man with a knife in a park near a major tourist attraction. I lived in NYC for 12 years and nothing of that sort happened my entire time there. Also not an argument. But I have had close calls in NYC as a tourist!