I am a very languid traveller. I'll take a leisurely early breakfast, do some sightseeing in the mid-morning to early afternoon - I like this pattern as the crowds don't seem to show up in force until noon. If I've decided on a hotel with a nice pool, I will hang out there with a book. If not, I will find a cafe, camp with the book, and take in the local colour. Then I will wash and change and decide on dinner.

I am so ready to be a retiree.

I definitely do lean towards the "you won't have enough time" crowd. Although I'll usually phrase it as "I hope you like airports and subways." Certain destinations tend to get hyper-ambitious itineraries, particularly Western Europe and New Zealand.

But I do like airports and subways!

Using the local public transport system is one of my favourite parts of traveling.

Thanks OP for this thread. I concur wholeheartedly.

It's one thing when geography makes travel a virtual impossibility.

But, if someone wants to just spend a day in London, that person should do so without the scorn of others.

Agreed. However, telling someone that 1 day is not necessarily scorn. It is impossible to tell whether someone with whom one is conversing in a public forum is a person who just wants to spend a day in London or someone who is unaware of how much London has to offer. I think that it is possible that the scorn is in the mind of the receiver rather than the deliverer of the information.

I've gone to SE Asia every summer since 1996 and it's generally quite nice, especially in June and July. Maybe you get the big downpour in the late afternoon but it tends to be brief. It's humid like Florida sometimes but more overcast than Florida (holding temperatures down) and places have air-conditioning and beach destinations have the sea breezes. It's better for the east coast vs. the west in Thailand and Malaysia, and it's the best time of the year weather wise for Java and Bali. Singapore is amazingly consistent year-round.

Usually the heaviest rains and biggest flood threat come in September and October.

I assume REP and CNX are two of your targets. I went to Angkor twice (1997 by myself and 2000 with friends) at 3 days each...it's much more crowded now but will only get more so (especially in that Christmas-New Year bloc). Maybe you can avoid the worst of the worst by taking the major sites out-of-sequence (i.e. don't go to the Bayon in the morning, Ta Phrom at midday, the main temple in the afternoon and the overlook hill in the late afternoon...zig when others zag). Chiang Mai is much easier to see in 2-3 days than Bangkok.

It's down to personal preference, as pretty much everyone has noted.

Personally - I believe that every visit somewhere should leave you wanting to return. I find that very liberating, as it means I no longer feel I have to 'see it all'. I can just do what I feel like there and then, with a few researched options in mind.

And then it comes down to interest as well. I used to work near the British Museum, and have visited it a fair few times, normally for special exhibitions. However, the permanent collections? Not my thing. I love the Great Court, there's some impressive woodblock prints, and the mummies are always good for a wander through, but there are those who will tell you to spend the entire day there.

I'm happy to spend a just a couple of days in a city or town. If I've just got a couple of hours there, I'll use them. Some say you're only scratching the surface by doing it this way, but I'm not sure why that's important. I'm also not sure that going to visit every tourist site and museum in a week gives you any more depth than choosing one or two in a couple of days, and spending the rest of the time eating, drinking and wandering.

So I'm with those who like to wander round a couple of days at a time. And when I come back, I'll enjoy it all the more. And I know I'm lucky to have that option. But if you want a once-in-a-lifetime trip to be just that, and take in every aspect of a destination, then fair play to you.

That matches my modus operandi!

You're welcome to travel with me anytime!

this, this this!!

My wife and I use this philosophy when planning our trip. But to balance, we've also learned that you should still want to relax and not spend the whole trip in transit, so always try to find that happy medium.

6 destinations in Argentina/Uruguay in a 2 week trip - too much for such a large space. We felt like we barely scratched the surface and that every other day was a long travel day. Maybe 4 destinations would have been better, sure, we could have missed out on some great hiking or beaches, but would have felt less rushed. That said, I would very much like to visit Argentina again.

A week in Hanoi - wayyy too long. By our 3rd day we were itching to get out of the city and by day 5 we reconfigured our trip to spend a couple extra days on the beach in Phu Quoc. We had a nice time in Hanoi but when I reflect I dont necessarily have the fondest memories of the city, primarily because we were bored.

When we travel now, we try to find that balance btw getting a good sense of our destination but not overstaying our visit. Nothing makes me happier than looking back and saying 'i wish i had an extra day to explore.' If I had a month, sure, i'd love to find a quaint apartment in a charming city and just live, but sadly thats not on the horizon for the forseeable future.

I love the idea of an AirBnB type stay, yet I question whether or not a week or more in a "charming city" might be too much, given my current obligations on the home front. Unless that charming city is also big and historical. We do not sit around and relax when on vacation. We like to see and do things.

Nothing to stop you doing AirBnB for 2/3 nights at a times, though - something I do quite regularly on holiday (depending on country - actually, I tend to mix AirBnB, guesthouses and the odd upscale hotel on the same trip, variety being the spice, and all that. Somewhere like India isn't so AirBnB-ey, but there's plenty other spices there to keep me going...)

Preach.

I am doing something similar over 16 days in Eastern Europe and the Balkans this summer. I am very early on in my career and I cant afford to take a *lot* of days off. No more than 23 anyway.

I agree the nature of the both the question and the answer can be unclear. As a person asking for information I usually provide a bit of the context for my question. It helps me get more useful suggestions.

For example, rather than simply post, "Visiting London for 1 day, what should I see?" I would contextualize my request as, "Hi! I'll be in London for one full day (arriving Friday night, leaving Sunday noon) this July in between trips. I know that a single day is nowhere near enough to visit all the 'must-see' attractions this world class city has to offer, but I'm curious what you'd suggest I see on a quick weekend visit. I'm particularly interested in architecture and photography, and I love walking and getting around via transit. Thanks!"

I'd say that that isn't imaginable for a European either. I had 20 days of vacation pro anno when I lived in Europe. Sure high seniority in generous places such a Germany and France may give you 25 or even 30 days. You cannot assemble 2 months out of that.

These long term tourists come from all over the World. I met younger Americans doing a year long tour through Oz or around the planet. It does happen. And yes, you usually have to sacrifice parts of the career.

The TA forum is very risk adverse and will suggest any connection less than 3 hours is pretty much risking your vacation or possibly ever getting home.

TripAdvisor is a very interesting place with a definite philosophy built in. Part of it is the "not enough time" mantra. The other theme that pervades the place is the notion that everyone who travels wants to travel on pennies/day no matter what. I did some of my research for a recent trip to Vietnam- 12 days on the ground in Vietnam- an I got the vibe that some folks were aghast at the notion of flying from Da Nang to Hanoi (rather than taking a sleeper train), let alone actually spending the appallingly high price of $50 for tickets on the more reliable Vietnam Airlines. Seriously? We have TWELVE DAYS. Do you really think I want to waste an entire night's sleep or risk wasting an entire day to save twenty bucks??? Je ne comprend pas......

Oh well. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.