Hey, all you singles in San Francisco/Oakland, looks like you live in the right place. Our fair city was tops in Forbes 7th Annual Best Cities for Singles Report.

The magazine made this determination using the following criteria: coolness, cost of living alone, culture, job growth, online dating (?), nightlife, number of singles. While we're not upset at this victory, we'd quibble with the notion that online dating, specifically "the number of active profiles in each city listed on dating site Yahoo! Personals", should factor in.

In the past, Forbes defined a city by its "Metropolitan Statistical Area"; now the magazine is defining a city by its narrower "Urbanized Area." Online dating helps to transcend geography -- the study using online dating as a factor flies in the face of this more-focused methodology.

Even with this contention, we'll say, as we often do: everybody loves a list. And everybody loves being pronounced "best." But will everybody love that they decided Mayor Newsom is "Most Eligible Bachelor?" Doubt it. How about "Most Eligible Bachelorette" Marissa Mayer -- a Veep at Goooooogle?

Here's Forbes' Top 10: 1. San Francisco-Oakland, Calif.; 2. New York City, N.Y.; 3. Los Angeles, Calif.; 4. Atlanta, Ga.; 5. Chicago, Ill.; 6. Washington, D.C.; 7. San Diego, Calif.; 8. Seattle, Wash.; 9. Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas; 10. Philadelphia, Pa.

For the extended list, methodology, and bonus articles (including one by the Bay Area's own Violet Blue) check out the extended article.

One more note: in an AP photo on the SF/Oakland feature, unless we're mistaken, there's a young lady that appears to be walking on Cupid's Span. NAUGHTY! NAUGHTY!