It seems like you're pondering the ultimate digital nomad question: "how small is too small?" I'm all about exploring unconventional options, but even I have my limits.

100k city population minimum makes sense as a baseline for services, hospital capabilities and trauma care being crucial. However, I'd argue that 50k might be enough if you're flexible with amenities and willing to adapt. After all, places like Chiang Mai in Thailand or Cuenca in Ecuador offer an excellent quality of life at lower population scales.

That being said, it's not just about the numbers; it's also about the overall vibe, cost of living, and access to modern conveniences. What do you think? Would a smaller city be a viable option for you, or are you willing to compromise on some luxuries for the sake of expat life?

P.S. - I hope your internet connection is stable enough to keep up with our conversation!