NeilGunton

I apologise for my snarky reply. It wasn't directed at you, but still, it was unwarranted and drew attention away from my main argument, which is this:

How much motor is "ok" here? I assume that most people would agree that full-on motorcycles are outside of the remit for this forum. And yet some seem to feel that e-bikes or e-assist or whatever you want to call it, are ok. So there is a line somewhere. I'm interested in where that line is.

Do we draw it in terms of watts? So e-bikes are ok as long as they only generate n watts, but anything above that would be regarded as a motorbike, and not appropriate for this forum? If so, then I posit that as the technology develops and gets better, that goal post will be constantly moving. If you say that n watts is ok, then there will always be someone who claims they need n+1 watts, due to a disability or medical issue. If "inclusiveness" is the mantra, then you will always have to allow people who are using more powerful e-bikes. And they will get better and better, trust me.

Or do you draw the line in terms of percentage of effort provided in the "assist"? So, say, a maximum of 30% provided by the bike, and then the rider must provide the rest? If so, then I posit that as the technology improves and the e-bikes become more capable, then there will always be people saying that they need more assist in order to participate. The world of disabilities is an infinite spectrum, after all, from mild all the way to almost complete inability to pedal a bike. So if you draw the line arbitrarily at x percent assist, then there will always be someone coming along who "needs" x+1 percent. As e-bikes improve, I'm pretty sure that eventually they will get to the point where they still largely "look" like bicycles, with pedals and all, but they are fully capable of providing most, if not all of the effort. Eventually, I think the pedaling part will become entirely optional (and possibly even only being included by the manufacturer for legal and marketing purposes). Which leads us to the inevitable logical conclusion, which is of "bicycle touring" being defined, for the purposes of this forum at least, as an activity which doesn't necessarily entail any actual effort. No different from motorcycle touring, in other words.

Or do you draw the line in terms of legal definitions of bicycles and e-bikes? In which case, I would point to the myriad of different jurisdictions, and ask which one we use here? That will be constantly changing too, as the technology develops.

I maintain that once you accept motorized bicycles as being an integral part of a "bicycle touring" forum, then the lines will become increasingly blurry as time progresses, until we are including what are effectively full-blown motorbikes. Not now, obviously, but as the technology improves, I think it's inevitable that these devices will improve to the point where even though they have pedals, that will be an entirely optional activity. I argue that this is an absurd conclusion, unless everybody is ok with "bicycle touring" being defined as a motorized activity where no effort is required at all.

This brings up another sensitive issue, which is "effort". I think it's true to say that many people consider the effort required to tour by bicycle to be an integral part of the activity. And yet I have seen comments here denigrating any mention of effort as a sign of being somehow overly competitive, or comparing yourself to others. This raises another interesting question: Is physical effort an integral part of bicycle touring? If not, then I think I should just go home, because obviously the definition of bicycle touring has shifted under my feet to such an extent that it is unrecognizable. But if effort is seen as integral, then this begs the questions I asked above, regarding where you draw the line in terms of motor power.

My stance is simply saying "bicycle touring, for the purposes of this forum, means no motor on the bicycle at all". This has no slippery slope, no blurry lines, and is easy to understand. It has nothing to do with number of gears, or number of wheels. Trikes and monocycles? Fine, why not, as long as you're doing the pedaling then who cares how many wheels you are using. See, things just get so much clearer when you simply say "no motors".

That said, I do acknowledge that there is a lot of overlap between "bicycle touring" and "e-bike touring". I think this overlap becomes clearer when you think about specific topics that people might raise, e.g. the best tent to use, or the best stove. These are general questions that do not require bringing up the type of bike you are using. I guess it could come up obliquely or in passing, as long as the discussion is not "about" the e-bike aspect, I don't see why it couldn't happen here. And if someone has a question that is specific to e-bikes, like batteries or charging or whatever, then that would reasonably be asked over on the specific e-bike forum. Even if you are asking about charging on the road during a tour, I'm sure that the e-bike forum would be the better place to ask about that. As we have seen here, some people get irritated when motors are brought into a "bicycle touring" forum, so any discussion that attempts to focus on the e-bike aspect will quickly be derailled by snark. Unfortunate, but a fact of life as we have seen. So I think that even though there is overlap there, the "bicycle touring" aspects can adequately be covered by this forum, and the "e-bike" aspects can adequately be covered by the existing e-bike forum. There's no reason why someone on an e-bike tour can't get insight here on all the other aspects of touring, as long as they don't try to make it primarily about the e-bike (in which case, it should probably have been asked on the other forum).

This seems like a reasonable approach, and one which I will probably try to adopt on my own websites. Crazyguyonabike will remain about non-motorized bicycle touring, and there will be an e-bike specific topic over on topicwise.com. People will be free to discuss whatever, as long as the main topic of the discussion is placed appropriately. If it's mainly a question about the e-bike side of things, then please put it on the e-bike topic, and if the question relates primarily to something related to bicycle touring in general (camping, cooking, panniers etc) then by all means have that discussion on crazyguyonabike. And where there are gray areas, I'll just play it by ear on a case by case basis. But I do think that having that "no motors" policy in place will help to clear up a lot of potential problems and confusion before they occur. And it completely ameliorates the "slippery slope" aspect of e-bikes getting better and better over time.

So in summary, I don't think a new "e-bike touring sub-forum" is really necessary here, since having the two existing separate forums is probably more than adequate. I don't think we need to ban all mention of e-bikes on the "bicycle touring" forum, that would be silly. I don't ban all talk of that on my website. I just tell people that e-bike journals belong over on topicwise.com (crazyguyonabike's sister website that works exactly the same, but covers topics outside of bicycle touring). Right now it's all on the general 'travel' topic, but I will certainly be creating an 'e-bike' topic so they can have their own space. If someone brings up e-bikes on crazyguyonabike then I don't ban them, I just gently try to point them to the right place, while clarifying that here is intended for discussion related to touring on bicycles without motors.

Just some more thoughts, fwiw.

Neil