Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Where is London's most central sheep?

diamondgeezer.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 174 posts

Re: Where is London's most central sheep?

#51

Post by macintux »

riffraff wrote: post #43
oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There needs to be a counterbalancing variable, though; presumably you want to live in a city, otherwise you'd just live in the countryside somewhere with a TTS of zero :) Maybe the other factor is "time for pizza to arrive at door"?

there's presumably pizza in the smallest towns tho, I'd suggest Time To Theatre. Not because of the Theatre per se, but because "big enough to have a theatre" is probably a good proxy of "big enough to be appealing to people who enjoy something other than nature".

In Indiana, my favorite dinner theater is in a town of 500 people.

For a while, someone was trying to start a theater in an even more remote spot, an unincorporated community about an hour from there with maybe a dozen homes nearby, but they finally moved it to a large town.

Re: Where is London's most central sheep?

#52

Post by noneeeed »

steerpike wrote: post #3

When my wife and I lived in Bristol we developed a metric designed to measure how enjoyable a city was to live in that we called "time to sheep". Basically it's a measure of how long you have to travel from the center of the city before you're in the English countryside surrounded by sheep and the best cities have a low (but not too low) "time to sheep" metric. It helped explain one of the reasons we loved living in…

I live in Bath, so quite a bit smaller than Bristol, but I really apprecaite the fact that we can be in the city centre in half an hour, or in the countryside in 15 minutes.

If I didn't live in Bath I'd probably live in Bristol, it's a great city. And I absolutely agree that it's kind of the perfect size for a metropolitan area.

I think a lot of London is saved by having so many parks, and so many large parks and commons. I know Paris has a lot less green space than London and when I visited I definitely felt that.

Re: Where is London's most central sheep?

#53

Post by tonyedgecombe »

noneeeed wrote: post #52
steerpike wrote: post #3

When my wife and I lived in Bristol we developed a metric designed to measure how enjoyable a city was to live in that we called "time to sheep". Basically it's a measure of how long you have to travel from the center of the city before you're in the English countryside surrounded by sheep and the best cities have a low (but not too low) "time to sheep" metric. It helped explain one of the reasons we loved living in…

I live in Bath, so quite a bit smaller than Bristol, but I really apprecaite the fact that we can be in the city centre in half an hour, or in the countryside in 15 minutes. If I didn't live in Bath I'd probably live in Bristol, it's a great city. And I absolutely agree that it's kind of the perfect size for a metropolitan area. I think a lot of London is saved by having so many parks, and so many large parks and com…

I like Bristol but the traffic is so bad. It desperately needs a tram system.

Bath is nice though, my son lives there and we love visiting.

Re: Where is London's most central sheep?

#54

Post by dhosek »

Hmm, not sure where the closest sheep is to me here in the inner suburbs of Chicago, but there is a goat farm a couple miles away in the Austin neighborhood. It’s pretty wild seeing them take the herd to their pasture a couple blocks away from the house where their shed is in the back yard.

Re: Where is London's most central sheep?

#55

Post by beeforpork »

steerpike wrote: post #3

When my wife and I lived in Bristol we developed a metric designed to measure how enjoyable a city was to live in that we called "time to sheep". Basically it's a measure of how long you have to travel from the center of the city before you're in the English countryside surrounded by sheep and the best cities have a low (but not too low) "time to sheep" metric. It helped explain one of the reasons we loved living in…

When I was in Bristol, the smell of burned weed was frequent. More frequent than other cities, I think.

Re: Where is London's most central sheep?

#58

Post by yapyap »

beeforpork wrote: post #55
steerpike wrote: post #3

When my wife and I lived in Bristol we developed a metric designed to measure how enjoyable a city was to live in that we called "time to sheep". Basically it's a measure of how long you have to travel from the center of the city before you're in the English countryside surrounded by sheep and the best cities have a low (but not too low) "time to sheep" metric. It helped explain one of the reasons we loved living in…

When I was in Bristol, the smell of burned weed was frequent. More frequent than other cities, I think.

Might’ve also been a secret bonus in the TTS metric

Re: Where is London's most central sheep?

#60

Post by marbs »

steerpike wrote: post #3

When my wife and I lived in Bristol we developed a metric designed to measure how enjoyable a city was to live in that we called "time to sheep". Basically it's a measure of how long you have to travel from the center of the city before you're in the English countryside surrounded by sheep and the best cities have a low (but not too low) "time to sheep" metric. It helped explain one of the reasons we loved living in…

I like that metric. If we instead consider "time to cows" then Cambridge does quite well. Midsummer Common, Stourbridge Common and The Backs have (seasonal) cows.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-5616806...

https://www.hiddencambridge.uk/#summer

Post reply on HN