Well, I'm a bit biased since I wrote a long love letter to Saigon and then 10,000 words about where to stuff your face there, but I disagree. The piece seems to funnel one person's (bitter) experiences versus writing something that actually extrapolates to the majority.  While there is the required "but here are the good parts" the headline seems hyperbolized. I've never been charged more when pulling out a wad of Dong; every time a moto taxi tries to charge more, I'd just keep smiling and insist on the real price, and they would almost always agree with a smile too, laughing at my persistence (this was based on instructions from another traveler who loves Vietnam -- "keep smiling, keep saying your price, then wait."). Sure, there were times when people tried to charge more, same as there were times in every other country I have visited. But in meeting other travellers along the way, or in the emails I've received, I've never had anyone say that they won't return. To the contrary, they are always sad to leave.

Perhaps that's merely a confirmation bias of my own writing, but with the exception of Nomadic Matt's post a few years ago, most long-term and short-term travellers I have come into contact with loved it there. Sure, it's different from other SEA countries, but each have their own history/culture, and I found Vietnam to be lovely. The piece seems to have been built around the headline vs. the other way around?

I disagree 100% with this and all the other anti-Vietnam stuff out there.  This is pure observational bias.  I could just as easily write an entire article or even a book (it wouldn't be very good) about all the wonderful, welcoming and honest people I met after a year in Vietnam, I could write out any negatives and declare that Vietnam is the friendliest and most welcoming place in the world.

It isn't of course and everywhere has its unique set of pros and cons, but just writing off an entire place because the people weren't smiley enough for your liking is plain daft. We don't write off London because taxi drivers have a tendency to take tourists the long way to their hotel. We don't write off Italy because of the overpriced coffee in Venice, an outright con if ever I saw one. There's obviously much more to these places than the conmen and shysters and as "professional travellers" we should know better.  The responsibility is ours to understand and appreciate the place, it wasn't put there for our pleasure.

For a more balanced discussion check this out.

I'm tired of reading link-baiting posts like this, whether it be on a place I love (such as Vietnam) or otherwise. Articles like this really turns me off reading blogs because I can see the process is going on here: create a controversial post and watch the links and outrage pour in. Usually in the manner that Jodi mentioned, by coming up with a title and then building the article around that. I'm commenting here because at least it is not adding another link to the outraged bloggersphere.

I have actually travelled with bloggers on what was I thought was a seemingly uneventful trip, but when I read their account it turned out to be all full of dramas.

I strongly advise anyone against reading the comments, especially if you're prone to high blood pressure. Some of the stuff in there is just plain nuts - "Oh I will be eventually return to give the country a chance to redeem itself" - I don't know how people can think in that way, let alone write it for general consumption.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions I guess, and it sure sounds like Vietnam and Mr Holidaze won't be crossing paths again, which is probably a good thing. Vietnam isn't for everyone but that doesn't mean it isn't for anyone.

Matt what is the ETA on that downvote button I've been pestering you for ;-)