Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Touring
Reload this Page >

What can the E-assist option bring for bicycle touring.

Notices
Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

What can the E-assist option bring for bicycle touring.

Old 07-18-16, 08:38 AM
  #176  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 4,317
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1752 Post(s)
Liked 796 Times in 434 Posts
So I imagine on a cycle touring forum the adults could be trusted to know the difference between the two and participate in threads accordingly.

I could enjoy a discourse related to someone touring via the aid of an E bike and could ignore or report one that solely revolved around talking about motors. Easy.

I personally don't feel the desire (other than curiosity) to ride an E bike but they do help some people engage in the activity that might not otherwise do so. Some people are making a big deal out of how much they need to pedal as a defining factor (and I enjoy that part myself) but there are many other aspects to cycle touring.

If one gets past the % effort pedaling it is pretty easy to see that all other aspects of touring are the same. People come here to talk and/or ask questions about cycle touring. Where would those people go to have those discussions. Saying the E forum is like saying someone with a loaded LHT could just get all their answers from the general or commuting sub forum. But no, the questions may be touring related and, even though there are a number of cycling sub forums, they come here for specific discussions.

Banning E related touring discussions would be like saying they can lurk here but never really belong, listen but don't talk, even though they may do more cycle touring than some who buy a bike and never take it out. Would it hurt us so much seeing as we seem to accept unicycles, recumbents, fixies, Penny Farthings and even upright tricycles? They are all just discussions among adults who have the mental capacity to understand what is being discussed after all.

E bike touring just brings more inclusion for some and another dimension to a great activity which is a positive.

I'll also say. The more people on bicycles, E or otherwise, means more cycle lanes, more cycle awareness programs and more cycling advocacy which is also a positive.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 07-18-16 at 08:57 AM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 09:17 AM
  #177  
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,797

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 984 Post(s)
Liked 33 Times in 31 Posts
Talking about E-Bike touring and how one can do it, in the touring forum is a positive for sure, and talking about motors isn't but it also needs to be addressed for people to know at what level the assist is at. Why? Because at some point assistance does become doing and you are now definitely riding a moped... Problem is at what level? Some people say zero, I go with the European standard, because it's low enough to not be able, to propel the bike by itself efficiently enough so one has to pedal, and no throttle... The American standard is WWAAaayy to high even in my book to be associated to touring in a bike touring forum. JMO

Last edited by 350htrr; 07-18-16 at 09:39 AM. Reason: spelling
350htrr is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 10:48 AM
  #178  
MixedRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
As long as the discussion about touring by bicycle does not revolve around e-bike issues, then fine.


There is an e-bike forum here for e-bike specific questions. There are motorcycle forums with touring/camping discussions as well.


I would not go to the e-bike forum to ask about which panniers are best. Similarly, people who ride e-bikes should not ask about battery life on the touring forum.


JMHO.
MixedRider is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 11:16 AM
  #179  
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,797

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 984 Post(s)
Liked 33 Times in 31 Posts
Unfortunately that is the exact type of questions that would be asked in a touring with an E-Bike forum. Thus my suggestion on having an E-Bike touring topic in the E-Bike section, or an E-Bike touring topic in the touring section... But then again why should anyone care if people start a thread on E-Bike touring and ask questions on how to make it work on the touring forum...?
350htrr is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 11:17 AM
  #180  
jefnvk
Senior Member
 
jefnvk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Metro Detroit/AA
Posts: 8,209

Bikes: 2016 Novara Mazama

Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3631 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by MixedRider View Post
There are motorcycle forums with touring/camping discussions as well.
Yes, because an e-bike is SO much more similar to a motorcycle than a traditional bicycle in the realm of touring. You think they are taking a bashing here, what do you honestly think guys on a BMW Adventure site are going to tell them?

Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
Unfortunately that is the exact type of questions that would be asked in a touring with an E-Bike forum. Thus my suggestion on having an E-Bike touring topic in the E-Bike section, or an E-Bike touring topic in the touring section... But then again why should anyone care if people start a thread on E-Bike touring and ask questions on how to make it work on the touring forum...?
No one should, unless they are an administrator on this site, just as Neil is the owner of his site and can choose to allow what he pleases. IN any case, how many niche subforums should you create, just because people can't skip over a topic they have no helpful advice on?
jefnvk is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 12:03 PM
  #181  
MixedRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by jefnvk View Post
Yes, because an e-bike is SO much more similar to a motorcycle than a traditional bicycle in the realm of touring. You think they are taking a bashing here, what do you honestly think guys on a BMW Adventure site are going to tell them?


My comment was not a "bashing" comment.


The context of my input was who cares how you tour, just make sure you post your concerns/comments in what you think would be the most appropriate forum or sub-forum. If someone comments here on what sleeping bag they use for "touring," who cares if they ride an motorcycle, e-bike, automobile, backpacking by foot, or human powered bike?


Asking a straight-up question about ebike battery may not be appropriate here. But post about your tour and how you overcame the battery challenge may be. Just try to use good judgement. That is all.


This thread was just a general question about ebikes input for touring. I have said my piece. Good day.
MixedRider is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 12:22 PM
  #182  
NeilGunton
Crazyguyonabike
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Albany, OR
Posts: 689

Bikes: Co-Motion Divide

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
Unfortunately that is the exact type of questions that would be asked in a touring with an E-Bike forum. Thus my suggestion on having an E-Bike touring topic in the E-Bike section, or an E-Bike touring topic in the touring section...
I would be ok with this in theory, but I guess it would depend on how it was presented in practice. I'm not all that familiar with the software used here on Bikeforums, but if they have the capability of having a "sub-forum" or related forum which is just listed somewhere like a sticky, then it might be fine... but it all depends on how it's presented, and how much additional friction and clutter it introduces in the user interface for people who are really just interested in the regular bicycle touring forum.

But then again why should anyone care if people start a thread on E-Bike touring and ask questions on how to make it work on the touring forum...?
I would care for the same reason I care about spam or other off-topic content. It's not harmless to have that stuff on the page in front of you. It takes up space, and you have to spend time processing it and excluding it, and people don't always make it clear in their subject lines what it is they are really talking about. For example, take a subject like "Have you seen this awesome new invention?" - in a bicycle touring forum I'd naturally expect that to be something directly related to, well, bicycle touring, and not (say) the world of electric motors or bike battery technology. And so on a dedicated "bicycle touring" forum, there would be a higher expectation that this link is "safe" to click, and worth my time. This is one of the reasons why I come here - on a good, on-topic forum, the signal to noise ratio is presumed to be quite high, so it's a safe bet that clicking on a link like that will actually be relevant to my interests. But if we just start saying the site policy is that "talk about motorized options like e-assist and e-bikes is fine, just ignore it if you're not interested", then that increases the noise level and lessens the value of the forum to me. I'm not saying that e-bike talk would be spam, but it might as well be in terms of my lack of desire to read about such things on a bicycle touring forum. That's part of why it's important to hash this stuff out, and why it doesn't make any sense to me when people want to say "it's all good, just ignore it if you're not interested". Signal to noise ratio... if the noise gets too high (and what constitutes "noise" is personal, obviously), then people start to leave. I think it would be sad if people started drifting off elsewhere simply because they felt the forum had lost its way and taken on motorized travel as being an ok, integral part of the discussion here. So you've got that tension between the "let's include everybody" folks and the "keep it about actual bicycles" meanies, I guess. And that's what we're trying to hash out here through rant therapy.

Neil

Last edited by NeilGunton; 07-18-16 at 01:11 PM. Reason: clarity
NeilGunton is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 12:35 PM
  #183  
jefnvk
Senior Member
 
jefnvk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Metro Detroit/AA
Posts: 8,209

Bikes: 2016 Novara Mazama

Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3631 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by MixedRider View Post
Asking a straight-up question about ebike battery may not be appropriate here. But post about your tour and how you overcame the battery challenge may be. Just try to use good judgement. That is all.
My bad, read your comment wrong, thought you were implying they should go to a motorcycle touring forum!
jefnvk is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 01:47 PM
  #184  
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,797

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 984 Post(s)
Liked 33 Times in 31 Posts
Originally Posted by NeilGunton View Post
I would be ok with this in theory, but I guess it would depend on how it was presented in practice. I'm not all that familiar with the software used here on Bikeforums, but if they have the capability of having a "sub-forum" or related forum which is just listed somewhere like a sticky, then it might be fine... but it all depends on how it's presented, and how much additional friction and clutter it introduces in the user interface for people who are really just interested in the regular bicycle touring forum.



I would care for the same reason I care about spam or other off-topic content. It's not harmless to have that stuff on the page in front of you. It takes up space, and you have to spend time processing it and excluding it, and people don't always make it clear in their subject lines what it is they are really talking about. For example, take a subject like "Have you seen this awesome new invention?" - in a bicycle touring forum I'd naturally expect that to be something directly related to, well, bicycle touring, and not (say) the world of electric motors or bike battery technology. And so on a dedicated "bicycle touring" forum, there would be a higher expectation that this link is "safe" to click, and worth my time. This is one of the reasons why I come here - on a good, on-topic forum, the signal to noise ratio is presumed to be quite high, so it's a safe bet that clicking on a link like that will actually be relevant to my interests. But if we just start saying the site policy is that "talk about motorized options like e-assist and e-bikes is fine, just ignore it if you're not interested", then that increases the noise level and lessens the value of the forum to me. I'm not saying that e-bike talk would be spam, but it might as well be in terms of my lack of desire to read about such things on a bicycle touring forum. That's part of why it's important to hash this stuff out, and why it doesn't make any sense to me when people want to say "it's all good, just ignore it if you're not interested". Signal to noise ratio... if the noise gets too high (and what constitutes "noise" is personal, obviously), then people start to leave. I think it would be sad if people started drifting off elsewhere simply because they felt the forum had lost its way and taken on motorized travel as being an ok, integral part of the discussion here. So you've got that tension between the "let's include everybody" folks and the "keep it about actual bicycles" meanies, I guess. And that's what we're trying to hash out here through rant therapy.

Neil
There you go, those are good reasons (noise level, signal to noise ratio) and I agree they count. But what shouldn't count or happen is people putting down E-Bikers as unworthy and saying that it be wrecking the pure touring forum allowing E-Bike touring to be on here... Thus my sub forum or topic thoughts, or like you suggested a sticky for E-Bike touring. As maybe the time has come for one... ?
350htrr is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 02:01 PM
  #185  
Caretaker
Heretic
 
Caretaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 2,201

Bikes: Specialized Sirrus, Giant OCR3, Giant CRS3

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1541 Post(s)
Liked 207 Times in 151 Posts
I haven't changed my mind since #106

'Let them post away on 'Touring' with their stories and tell what they want or not, just like everyone else here.'
Caretaker is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 02:06 PM
  #186  
NeilGunton
Crazyguyonabike
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Albany, OR
Posts: 689

Bikes: Co-Motion Divide

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
But what shouldn't count or happen is people putting down E-Bikers as unworthy and saying that it be wrecking the pure touring forum allowing E-Bike touring to be on here...
But I don't think anyone was actually doing that. It's just hard to say "x doesn't belong here" without some proponent of x getting offended.

Thus my sub forum or topic thoughts, or like you suggested a sticky for E-Bike touring. As maybe the time has come for one... ?
I don't know if I'd actually be in favor of a sticky, because a) I honestly don't like stickies, they are annoying because I always have to scroll down past them to get to the "real" content, and b) it would be a tacit admission that e-bikes are now an accepted part of the bicycle touring landscape, and I don't really accept that, for reasons which have already been hashed and rehashed ad nauseam. What I was saying is that I acknowledge that there are certain commonalities between people who might choose to tour on an e-bike and those of us who choose to do self-propelled bike touring. Given that, it would seem to make sense for there to be some kind of cross-link between here and whatever other forum or space is given to e-bike touring, that's all. I don't know, this isn't a fully formed idea, I'm just spit-balling. For all I know the mods here don't really care and aren't going to do anything anyway. They are constrained by what the VBulletin software gives them and are most likely more concerned with hitcounts and ad views than purity of the content.

Neil
NeilGunton is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 02:09 PM
  #187  
jonc123
Ozark Hillbilly
 
jonc123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Show Me State
Posts: 680

Bikes: Long Haul Trucker

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 136 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Advocacy & Safety - Bike Forums

That forum has a VC subforum at the top.
jonc123 is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 02:25 PM
  #188  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 4,317
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1752 Post(s)
Liked 796 Times in 434 Posts
Neil,

Honestly, what I am trying to understand is why you are here on this site trying to sway what is allowed or not when you have a very large website and like minded community of your own that you already control exclusively. It's a huge website! Is it not enough that you do have that community where you can discuss pure bike touring without having to try to eliminate the E bike threat here as well? What's up with that. Does the whole internet have to conform to your personal world view? You like to call others whom you think have an agenda names and call discourse rant therapy but it seems you have a larger agenda of your own to promote.

But I guess, if you completely disallow discussion of the subject on your own site you are forced to come here to talk about it - kind of caught in your own web there. Perhaps if you allowed discussion about E bike touring on your site you could also discuss the pros and cons of it there.

Do you not wish to soil your website with such discussion and so, talk dirty here and claim purity there? I'm actually asking because I don't get why, if you feel discussing E bike touring on a bike touring forum is wrong, you are actually on a bike touring forum discussing it. Thank goodness BF is a place we can figure that out eh.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 07-18-16 at 02:38 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 02:46 PM
  #189  
NeilGunton
Crazyguyonabike
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Albany, OR
Posts: 689

Bikes: Co-Motion Divide

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Neil,

Honestly, what I am trying to understand is why you are here on this site trying to sway what is allowed or not when you have a very large website and like minded community of your own that you already control exclusively. It's a huge website! Is it not enough that you do have that community where you can discuss pure bike touring without having to try to eliminate the E bike threat here as well? What's up with that. Does the whole internet have to conform to your personal world view? You like to call others whom you think have an agenda names and call discourse rant therapy but it seems you have a larger agenda of your own to promote.

But I guess, if you completely disallow discussion of the subject on your own site you are forced to come here to talk about it - kind of caught in your own web there. Perhaps if you allowed discussion about E bike touring on your site you could also discuss the pros and cons of it there.

Do you not wish to soil your website with such discussion and so, talk dirty here and claim purity there? I'm actually asking because I don't get why, if you have your way already, where you live, why you feel the need to have your way everywhere else as well.
There have been discussions about e-bikes on the crazyguyonabike forums. I don't automatically shut them down, but I do generally re-state my policy that the site is for non-motorized bicycles only. I don't see that I'm being inconsistent here, by arguing the same position. As to why I'm here on bikeforums, I thought you were all in favor of inclusiveness? Or does that inclusiveness only cover people who agree with you? You can't have it both ways, you know.

But hypocrisy aside, why I am here is because I am interested in bicycle touring, obviously, and I saw an interesting discussion developing, one which I have opinions on, and I saw that certain viewpoints were perhaps not being represented. I also saw people who had viewpoints similar to my own being labeled as trolls, and calls for them to be banned from the discussion. I felt a need to say something, so I said it. A forum is a place for discussion, and here on bikeforums, it is still a point of contention as to whether or not e-bikes have a place here. I am not trying to shape the whole internet to my liking, I'm just expressing a viewpoint, as are you. The fact that I run another bicycle touring website is neither here nor there - on bikeforums, my view carries no more or less weight than yours, and I fully accept that. On my own website I have already made certain choices about what I allow, and the mods here will make their choices, and in the meantime the forum is a place where such things can be discussed... what's the problem? I think I've earned the right to be regarded as posting "in good faith" and not trolling, so you can't throw that one at me. It's a forum. I'm foruming, to coin a phrase.

Neil

Last edited by NeilGunton; 07-18-16 at 03:13 PM.
NeilGunton is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 02:57 PM
  #190  
Doug64
Senior Member
 
Doug64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,877
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 913 Post(s)
Liked 269 Times in 157 Posts
FWIW, this was in the "Definition" section of the Manitoba, Canada's Highway Traffic Act. It was the 2016 version. I was looking for their policy about bikes on their major highways and came across this:

"Bicycle" means a device having any number of wheels upon which a person sits astride and which is propelled solely by human muscular power through the use of pedals; ( bicyclette )."

Last edited by Doug64; 07-18-16 at 03:10 PM.
Doug64 is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 03:00 PM
  #191  
Caretaker
Heretic
 
Caretaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 2,201

Bikes: Specialized Sirrus, Giant OCR3, Giant CRS3

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1541 Post(s)
Liked 207 Times in 151 Posts
Originally Posted by Doug64 View Post
FWIW, this was in the "Definition" section of the Manitoba, Canada's Highway Safety Act. It was the 3016 version. I was looking for their policy about bikrs on their major highways and came across this.


"Bicycle" means a device having any number of wheels upon which a person sits astride and which is propelled solely by human muscular power through the use of pedals; ( bicyclette )"
3016 version.
Caretaker is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 03:13 PM
  #192  
Doug64
Senior Member
 
Doug64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Oregon
Posts: 5,877
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 913 Post(s)
Liked 269 Times in 157 Posts
Originally Posted by Caretaker View Post
3016 version.
Yeah, working from my phone, and the unedited version was inadvertently posted.
Doug64 is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 03:13 PM
  #193  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 4,317
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1752 Post(s)
Liked 796 Times in 434 Posts
Originally Posted by NeilGunton View Post
There have been discussions about e-bikes on the crazyguyonabike forums. I don't automatically shut them down, but I do generally re-state my policy that e-bike journals are not permitted on the site. I don't see that I'm being inconsistent here, by arguing the same position. As to why I'm here on bikeforums, I thought you were all in favor of inclusiveness? Or does that inclusiveness only cover people who agree with you? You can't have it both ways, you know.

But hypocrisy aside, why I am here is because I am interested in bicycle touring, obviously, and I saw an interesting discussion developing, one which I have opinions on, and I saw that certain viewpoints were perhaps not being represented. I felt a need to say something, so I said it. A forum is a place for discussion, and here on bikeforums, it is still a point of contention as to whether or not e-bikes have a place here. I am not trying to shape the whole internet to my liking, I'm just expressing a viewpoint, as are you. The fact that I run another bicycle touring website is neither here nor there - on bikeforums, my view carries no more or less weight than yours, and I fully accept that. On my own website I have already made certain choices about what I allow, and the mods here will make their choices, and in the meantime the forum is a place where such things can be discussed... what's the problem? I think I've earned the right to be regarded as posting "in good faith" and not trolling, so you can't throw that one at me. It's a forum. I'm foruming, to coin a phrase.

Neil
I believe you do have a right to discuss E bike touring here so I am not trying to silence you or only have my opinion heard. That is inclusiveness. My point is that you have faced that question on your own site and fallen in favour of not allowing discussion. I guess I just don't see, if you believe there is no place for such discussions on bike touring forums you are here having the discussion. That is the hypocrisy. Saying you favour some types of discussions but not others speaks to how much one control over content one wishes to exert on a community. If it's just one voice one vote, then that control should be minimal.

If I were in the same position I think I would maintain my decision and just not discuss E bikes in bike touring forums. I would be in luck because I would belong to a forum that reflects my POV (seeing that I control the content).

However, this is my community and we are facing this issue here so I am voicing my opinions here because the outcome will effect my community. I will not try to push a decision one way or the other and then leave the community to go back to another and not face the results I have had a part in creating.

But yes, you are allowed here, and you are allowed to voice your POV, and I hope E bike riders are also allowed here to enjoy the same freedom you both deny others and adopt for yourself concurrently.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 07-18-16 at 03:18 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 03:24 PM
  #194  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 4,317
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1752 Post(s)
Liked 796 Times in 434 Posts
Originally Posted by Doug64 View Post
FWIW, this was in the "Definition" section of the Manitoba, Canada's Highway Traffic Act. It was the 2016 version. I was looking for their policy about bikes on their major highways and came across this:

"Bicycle" means a device having any number of wheels upon which a person sits astride and which is propelled solely by human muscular power through the use of pedals; ( bicyclette )."
Doug, I just think that goes to show how differing people/sources have differing definitions of what one is.
From Webster's online dictionary;

Full Definition of bicycle

  1. : a vehicle with two wheels tandem, handlebars for steering, a saddle seat, and pedals by which it is propelled; also : a stationary exercise machine that resembles such a vehicle.


Note how recumbents, trikes and unicycles are excluded but a stationary exercise bike would be allowed. Note also how an e assist fits within the definition. The question is, who gets to decide what definition allows or excludes discussion.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 03:32 PM
  #195  
NeilGunton
Crazyguyonabike
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Albany, OR
Posts: 689

Bikes: Co-Motion Divide

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
I guess I just don't see, if you believe there is no place for such discussions on bike touring forums you are here having the discussion. That is the hypocrisy.
Huh? The debate is about whether or not motorized bicycles have a place in a "bicycle touring" forum. How am I being hypocritical by participating in the discussion? Having an opinion in a meta-discussion about what should be included cannot be hypocritical, otherwise by definition you'd never be able to have any such debates at all.

How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go on this one? I'm a programmer, and pretty good at recursive thinking, I'll warn you.

If I were in the same position I think I would maintain my decision and just not discuss E bikes in bike touring forums. I would be in luck because I would belong to a forum that reflects my POV (seeing that I control the content).
Ok, that's your prerogative... but for me personally, just because I run a different website doesn't mean that I can't participate in other forums - especially if a debate arises where people with a point of view that mirrors my own are being labeled as trolls and asked to leave the room. I don't participate in bikeforums much, but if I feel something needs saying, then I'll say it.

But yes, you are allowed here, and you are allowed to voice your POV, and I hope E bike riders are also allowed here to enjoy the same freedom you both deny others and adopt for yourself concurrently.
Ah, but that's the very matter under discussion, isn't it? That is the point of contention. Maybe you need to ponder the difference between regular discussions and meta-discussions (discussions about discussions), which is what we're having here. You're saying that "since Neil has the right to come here and say that x shouldn't be part of the discourse on the bicycle touring forum, therefore I should have the right to discuss x". See, doesn't make much sense in terms of logic, since you are in effect mixing apples and oranges.

All that being said, I'm not really interested in having discussions about whether discussions about discussions are the same as the discussions under discussion, so if it's ok I'm going to go do some carpentry to clear my head.

Neil
NeilGunton is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 03:44 PM
  #196  
350htrr
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada, PG BC
Posts: 3,797

Bikes: 27 speed ORYX with over 39,000Kms on it and another 14,000KMs with a BionX E-Assist on it

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 984 Post(s)
Liked 33 Times in 31 Posts
Again, nobody was labelled a troll who had the viewpoint that E-Bikes should not be allowed here in bicycle touring land... I did suggest that people who kept saying things like, get off you fat butt, try harder you don't need to use a motor, or posted things like batteries on fire for putting down E-Biking or for entertainment were perhaps trolling...
350htrr is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 03:56 PM
  #197  
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Left Coast, Canada
Posts: 4,317
Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1752 Post(s)
Liked 796 Times in 434 Posts
Call it a meta discussion if you want. Isn't meta discussion part of the "slippery slope" you are trying to avoid by allowing no discussion on your site? I think most people can see the double standard apparent in not allowing discussion in your backyard but participating in discussion in someone else's, call it what you will.

There have been discussions about e-bikes on the crazyguyonabike forums. I don't automatically shut them down, but I do generally re-state my policy that the site is for non-motorized bicycles only.

Well, what would be the point of having any discussion (meta or otherwise) if the end result is that you have already made a decision to not allow discussion. What kind of discussion would that be? Again, it's one of those things you say which sounds good until one really thinks about it. Then it sounds like window dressing to mask the plain fact that you come from one site that does not allow discussion to another that does so you can discuss the subject.

You could go into the most logic filled, meta inspired, computer programmer designed argument you want but you can't avoid the fact that you are having it here.. on Bike Forums and not on your own website. That speaks volumes.

"...especially if a debate arises where people with a point of view that mirrors my own are being labeled as trolls and asked to leave the room."

No one was asked to leave the room. Only one poster (Big Aura) was addressed by a Mod and then simply asked to not tell other people to leave the room. Funny eh? It would seem those that mirror your POV do so by trying to silence discussion. I could multi quote the examples but anyone can see the whole thing unaltered on Pages one and two.

I stated that I hoped, when the time came, that the mods would only lock out the poster who was blatantly trolling instead of locking the whole thread which would, in effect, achieve his overall goal. It appears the mods did not intervene and let the discussion develop. The fact that there have been 197 posts on the subject only speaks to the credit that BF so far is a place that allows discussion - by both sides. If you had your way, it would not be.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 07-18-16 at 04:24 PM.
Happy Feet is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 04:24 PM
  #198  
MixedRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 350htrr View Post
Again, nobody was labelled a troll who had the viewpoint that E-Bikes should not be allowed here in bicycle touring land... I did suggest that people who kept saying things like, get off you fat butt, try harder you don't need to use a motor, or posted things like batteries on fire for putting down E-Biking or for entertainment were perhaps trolling...
Agreed.
This can easily turn into a philosophical debate about ebikes and we have all learned that is a losing battle. I have learned to accept them. Especially thanks to 350htrr. I actually asked him in another thread why he chose an e-bike for touring. He had a legit answer. He helped me understand something I was somewhat ignorant to. Can't argue with that!

And specific to the debate about people riding e-bikes providing input for touring; Yes, they have valuable input to the touring community as it reflects the act of touring. Neil even admits that he lets some discussions which the poster used an e-bike stay on his own website, but re-iterates his position of e-bike related posts are generally not allowed.

If someone has a concern about the legality of e-bikes or the legal classification of e-bikes, that should be brought up in the e-bike sub-forum or the advocacy sub-forum. Write your congressman or state representative when rules are up for review or a vote. Learn the rules of where you are or where you are going relating to e-bikes.
MixedRider is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 04:27 PM
  #199  
NeilGunton
Crazyguyonabike
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Albany, OR
Posts: 689

Bikes: Co-Motion Divide

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Call it a meta discussion if you want. Isn't meta discussion part of the "slippery slope" you are trying to avoid by allowing no discussion on your site?
Um, no. If I say that allowing motorized bicycles here is a slippery slope, then that is entirely consistent with my position on my own site. I think you're a little confused about the meaning of language, which does make it difficult to have a meaningful conversation with you. I'm sorry, not trying to be mean, it's just the truth. It's like you're just tossing up what I said and throwing it back at me as word salad.

I think most people can see the double standard apparent in not allowing discussion in your backyard but participating in discussion in someone else's, call it what you will.
You seem to have entirely missed the point about the difference between having a discussion about x, and having a discussion about whether or not x should even be part of the discourse.

No one was asked to leave the room. Only one poster (Big Aura) was addressed by a Mod and then simply asked to not tell other people to leave the room. Funny eh? It would seem those that mirror your POV do so by trying to silence discussion. I could multi quote the examples but anyone can see the whole thing unaltered on Pages one and two.
What I saw was repeated instances of people being called trolls and being told that they shouldn't even be here. It seems that the standard response to someone who persistently disagrees with you now is to label them a troll. This is a perversion of the word, since it should only apply to people who are not arguing in good faith. I believe that arguing that a bicycle touring forum shouldn't include motorized vehicles is anything but trollish - it's just common bloody sense, but maybe that's just me.

I stated that I hoped, when the time came, that the mods would only lock out the poster who was blatantly trolling instead of locking the whole thread which would, in effect, achieve his overall goal. It appears the mods did not intervene and let the discussion develop.
Here's the thing, though - I didn't see anybody trolling. They were making a very simple argument that made perfect sense to me. And when they didn't sit down and shut up like they were instructed to by the "include everybody, as long as they agree with us" crowd, they were labeled as a troll and kicked off the discussion. I read the early part of the thread where that was going on, and I was struck that I would have said many of the same things, and thus been labeled as a troll, and that irked me because I don't think of myself as a troll. I've been running a fairly popular bicycle touring website for over 15 years, and during that entire time I have been under the impression that one of the basic tenets of bicycle touring is that, oh I dunno, you have to use a BICYCLE. And to most reasonable people, bicycle means no motor. Otherwise it's a motorcycle. But that's the entire crux of the argument here, so no point in going over all that again.

Listen, the mods here will decide whatever goes, goes - but in the meantime, I believe there was something that needed to be said, so I said it. And that doesn't make me a hypocrite - the meaning of the word entails saying one thing and then doing the opposite, and my viewpoint here is entirely consistent with my opinion over on crazyguyonabike. And it's not hypocritical to argue against something if the thing being argued against is the thing under discussion - it's the very nature of discussion, otherwise how on earth would anybody ever dispute anything.

I think this has gotten a bit personal again, what with people questioning why I'm here (I can hear the wheels slowly grinding around to labelling me a troll too). I don't want to be blamed for getting the thread locked, so I'm just going to say that I've made my points and had my say, and try to leave it at that. If the rest of you want to keep going around the same circles, then feel free. No doubt this will generate the standard gleeful "Oh good, now we can get on with discussing that thing you keep saying we shouldn't be discussing", to which I can only reply in advance, "whatever". If this is what you people collectively want your bike touring forum to be, then have at it. I tried.

Neil
NeilGunton is offline  
Old 07-18-16, 04:57 PM
  #200  
MixedRider
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 173
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 27 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by NeilGunton View Post
Um, no. If I say that allowing motorized bicycles here is a slippery slope, then that is entirely consistent with my position on my own site. I think you're a little confused about the meaning of language, which does make it difficult to have a meaningful conversation with you. I'm sorry, not trying to be mean, it's just the truth. It's like you're just tossing up what I said and throwing it back at me as word salad.

You seem to have entirely missed the point about the difference between having a discussion about x, and having a discussion about whether or not x should even be part of the discourse.

What I saw was repeated instances of people being called trolls and being told that they shouldn't even be here. It seems that the standard response to someone who persistently disagrees with you now is to label them a troll. This is a perversion of the word, since it should only apply to people who are not arguing in good faith. I believe that arguing that a bicycle touring forum shouldn't include motorized vehicles is anything but trollish - it's just common bloody sense, but maybe that's just me.

Here's the thing, though - I didn't see anybody trolling. They were making a very simple argument that made perfect sense to me. And when they didn't sit down and shut up like they were instructed to by the "include everybody, as long as they agree with us" crowd, they were labeled as a troll and kicked off the discussion. I read the early part of the thread where that was going on, and I was struck that I would have said many of the same things, and thus been labeled as a troll, and that irked me because I don't think of myself as a troll. I've been running a fairly popular bicycle touring website for over 15 years, and during that entire time I have been under the impression that one of the basic tenets of bicycle touring is that, oh I dunno, you have to use a BICYCLE. And to most reasonable people, bicycle means no motor. Otherwise it's a motorcycle. But that's the entire crux of the argument here, so no point in going over all that again.

Listen, the mods here will decide whatever goes, goes - but in the meantime, I believe there was something that needed to be said, so I said it. And that doesn't make me a hypocrite - the meaning of the word entails saying one thing and then doing the opposite, and my viewpoint here is entirely consistent with my opinion over on crazyguyonabike. And it's not hypocritical to argue against something if the thing being argued against is the thing under discussion - it's the very nature of discussion, otherwise how on earth would anybody ever dispute anything.

I think this has gotten a bit personal again, what with people questioning why I'm here (I can hear the wheels slowly grinding around to labelling me a troll too). I don't want to be blamed for getting the thread locked, so I'm just going to say that I've made my points and had my say, and try to leave it at that. If the rest of you want to keep going around the same circles, then feel free. No doubt this will generate the standard gleeful "Oh good, now we can get on with discussing that thing you keep saying we shouldn't be discussing", to which I can only reply in advance, "whatever". If this is what you people collectively want your bike touring forum to be, then have at it. I tried.

Neil

You make some very valuable points in earlier posts, so lets not make this a philosophical debate about ebikes being in existence.

It sounds like you are completely opposed to e-bikes for touring. However, in post #189 you state you have tolerated some posts on your website about e-bikes. I just did a google search of your website and there are numerous ebike entries.
Let me google that for you

There appears to be a fine-line where input from people touring on ebikes can provide valuable feedback as it relates to touring, even on crazyguyonabike. That is the whole point of discussion of this thread. So where is that said line?

IMHO, If the post is mostly about the e-bike, then no, it doesn't belong here. But if you toured, on a legally allowed ebike, what is the harm of posting about your experience of the tour, providing input as to touring? People can decide for themselves if it is something they like or not.
MixedRider is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.