Languish, help me plan a Euro vacation. Rome, Paris and London.

[mongers]

Cornwall is beautiful. Lots of rich Londoners have their second home there.
And some of the best holidays of my childhood were in Yorkshire. It has some very nice areas. York is really a place anyone into history should visit at some point.
Siena too was great. Anybody who is in the area should ignore the crowds heading to Florence and spend a day there instead.

I wasn't suggesting those particular places though. Just saying there are much nicer places to visit in Europe than the 3 mentioned and I've yet to visit highly rated big places like Madrid or Berlin. Some variety from capitals would be an improvement too.

But as the first place to visit?

My mother asked me about italy a month or two ago, asking about the little town that I had enjoyed.  That town was San Gimignano in Tuscany, and indeed, it was probably my favourite part of the trip (except for meeting Languishites).  However, if I was only going to visit one place in Italy, it would be Rome, not San Gimignano.  I suppose it's checking things off the "bucket list" - there are lots of charming towns and regions in the world, but there's only one Colosseum, one Eifel Tower, one London Bridge.

Eeek, that's one unremarkable bridge, I wouldn't cross the road to see it.

[The Larch]

He probably meant Tower Bridge.

[Caliga]

I've spent a week in London and probably 2-3 days in Rome.  I felt like it wasn't enough for Rome, but probably just right for London (though one of those days I was actually in Canterbury).

I agree with others that it'd be hard to do all three of those in that time and not feel very rushed.

[mongers]

He probably meant Tower Bridge.

Oh no doubt, but it's still odd as Tower bridge isn't exactly wonderful, it's a rather yucky piece of victoriana, the most interesting thing about it is the lifting mechanism and engines.

The world if full of many more interesting and beautiful bridges, hell the modern French road network has some astonishing bridges. 

[Admiral Yi]

The people arguing that not enough time is being spent in each city seem to be implying that each city contains a number of sites that must be taken in order to earn the certificate for that city.  You can have a fantastic time visiting a great city for 3 days.

My advice to you Lusti (in addition to my previous awesome advice about people watching) is to keep the number of sites you hit small.  Much better to savor a few than to rush around town punching your ticket.

[Caliga]

Also, Beeb... I loved taking a guided tour of Italy.  For two weeks, my job was to sightsee, eat, drink, and relax.  I didn't have to drive, worry about where I was going, or what hotel to stay in.  They took care of everything, even down to getting us 'preferred' tickets at the Vatican so we could skip the long lines and go right in.

[Caliga]

The people arguing that not enough time is being spent in each city seem to be implying that each city contains a number of sites that must be taken in order to earn the certificate for that city.  You can have a fantastic time visiting a great city for 3 days.

My advice to you Lusti (in addition to my previous awesome advice about people watching) is to keep the number of sites you hit small.  Much better to savor a few than to rush around town punching your ticket.

I'm sorry but I do not agree.  When I've not done enough in a city I've always left with regrets or thoughts of "well, I guess I need to go back there someday."  Don't be like me, Lusti

[mongers]

The people arguing that not enough time is being spent in each city seem to be implying that each city contains a number of sites that must be taken in order to earn the certificate for that city.  You can have a fantastic time visiting a great city for 3 days.

My advice to you Lusti (in addition to my previous awesome advice about people watching) is to keep the number of sites you hit small.  Much better to savor a few than to rush around town punching your ticket.

I'm sorry but I do not agree.  When I've not done enough in a city I've always left with regrets or thoughts of "well, I guess I need to go back there someday."  Don't be like me, Lusti

Yeah, Cal still regrets not having properly auditioning British motorway catering.   

[Caliga]

I will say that the Autogrill establishments along the Italian autostrada are top notch.

[The Larch]

He probably meant Tower Bridge.

Oh no doubt, but it's still odd as Tower bridge isn't exactly wonderful, it's a rather yucky piece of victoriana, the most interesting thing about it is the lifting mechanism and engines.

The world if full of many more interesting and beautiful bridges, hell the modern French road network has some astonishing bridges.

Like it or not, it's an iconic landmark of London.

[Ed Anger]

Also, Beeb... I loved taking a guided tour of Italy.  For two weeks, my job was to sightsee, eat, drink, and relax.  I didn't have to drive, worry about where I was going, or what hotel to stay in.  They took care of everything, even down to getting us 'preferred' tickets at the Vatican so we could skip the long lines and go right in.

I like gelato.

[alfred russel]

The people arguing that not enough time is being spent in each city seem to be implying that each city contains a number of sites that must be taken in order to earn the certificate for that city.  You can have a fantastic time visiting a great city for 3 days.

My advice to you Lusti (in addition to my previous awesome advice about people watching) is to keep the number of sites you hit small.  Much better to savor a few than to rush around town punching your ticket.

Not at all. How much sense does it make to fly from one place to another (and lose a day to travel) when you haven't seen all the "Class A" sites in a location? Lusti's tour, for instance, doesn't cover the Louvre or Versailles. Even with a free day you can't hit both.

Another danger trying to do so much that you don't get to enjoy anything (like say squeeze in the Louvre and Versailles in a single day).

[Caliga]

I like gelato.

You would like Florence then.

[Ed Anger]

I like gelato.

You would like Florence then.

Only got to Milan. And was lectured on who to vote for. euros. 

[Admiral Yi]

Not at all. How much sense does it make to fly from one place to another (and lose a day to travel) when you haven't seen all the "Class A" sites in a location? Lusti's tour, for instance, doesn't cover the Louvre or Versailles. Even with a free day you can't hit both.

Another danger trying to do so much that you don't get to enjoy anything (like say squeeze in the Louvre and Versailles in a single day).

Does it take a day to get from London to Paris?