Robert C

Lazy is relative. I have been asked why I ride a bike to work, I tell people that I am too lazy to walk from the parking lot. I have been asked why I ride a recumbent, again, I have responded that I am lazy and abhor discomfort. As said, lazy is relative and is frequently used in self-defenterial humor.

jefnvk

So?

Not everyone's goals match. My fiancee probably would have enjoyed an ebike on our last tour, she couldn't have cared less that she made it from one country to another solely under her own power, and really couldn't have cared at all what you thought of her doing so. She was there to see windmills and tulips and enjoy being outside in the Northern European countryside, not brag about how she HTFU. Guess what? I really wouldn't have given two craps if she had one, and I didn't. We'd have been doing what you claim to be doing, and enjoying our tour, regardless of your opinion.

In any case, since I can't quote it, what happened to this insistence about not talking to people on e-bikes about bike touring?

"In a couple weeks I'm heading to Switzerland for a bike tour. The bike will be powered entirely by me. If I come across someone traveling on an e-bike, I probably won't have much to say to them about bike touring. Maybe other things, but not bike touring. Same thing if I come across someone traveling by motorcycle, car or train. Nothing against other modes of travel, unless you try to equate one with the other."

From Post #102 here: https://www.bikeforums.net/touring/10...-ebikes-5.html

Happy Feet

I can just see Alan standing by the hotel pool ranting at all the people sun bathing for being so lazy... too funny.

What's also funny (not) is that you say you are so concerned about the negative effects of e bikes yet the only other thread about e bikes currently here was started by you solely for the purpose of judging what some complete strangers were doing. Quoted from post one:

"I'm in my late 60s and it came as a shock that people obviously capable of riding a bicycle over long distances would find it acceptable to use the assistance of an electric motor."

Did it ever occur to you.. Who cares?

Now you have found a like minded partner here who goes abroad to tour and is equally preoccupied with judging what another complete stranger does.

Again, Who cares?

You think you are presenting some argument against e bikes but you are just illustrating what a judgemental guy on a bike might sound like. Like a precautionary tale.

Caretaker

Two very active threads, one started by me and this one not started by me. I'd say lots of people care. We can all give our opinion and I've given mine.

I think Ebikes are great for people who couldn't otherwise tour but I see societal dangers also if they start supplanting the bicycle among the general population. All new technologies have benefits and adverse side effects so maybe exploring both in relation to Ebikes is a useful exercise.

Robert C

The societal dangers of people leaving their car at home?
The adverse side effects of people going for an e-bike ride in the evening and getting their heart rate up a bit?

Or, as someone above observed, the absolute horror of a cycle tourist finding a way for his wife to enjoy taking part in his cycle touring along with him?

This doesn't quite sound like the apocalypse to me.

Caretaker

No, but if people who are cycling or who would be inclined to take up cycling turn to Ebikes and convince themselves that they're making the same gain because it's just 'assistance' then that, in my book, would be an adverse side effect.

Are motorists likely to give up the comfort and status appeal of the automobile for a battery powered bike? Apart from a very few eccentrics I personally doubt it. Much more lively they'll buy a proper motorbike .

350htrr

Nobody ever said that, 19% is the average assistance I get, so that is a 81% workout... Instead of sitting on the couch.

In the wife's case it's 25% assistance and she gets an 75% workout instead if sitting on the couch...

The 30% assistance number I usually used was the manufacturer's numbers...

Now the American spec E-Bicycle is probably used like you say, but not the EU E-Bicycle because it just cant be used like that...

And yes some people would ride the bike with full assistance and get 90% assistance with them only getting 10% exercise... But he also wouldn't get far on a tour. Even the woman in Switzerland acknowledged she wasn't working as hard as her husband, but at least she was out there, and that's a good thing. Not an adverse effect at all... IMO

Robert C

Again, this is taking us far from touring and should be addressed in the proper subforum.

I am in the US and here there is no "status appeal" to an auto. In the US there are, generally, two groups riding bikes to work, those at the extreme bottom, and those well above the middle (yes, we are at a bike enthusiast site; so you may find exceptions here). As far as buying a motorbike to commute on, very unlikely in the US, yes, some do it; but they are primarily motorcycle enthusiasts looking for another reason to ride, not people just looking for a good way to get to work.

As far as the "gain" from riding an e-bike, there are so many people telling their stories of health benefits from e-bikes that it would be pointless to recite them all. You fear that it is not the exact same level of gain that they would have gotten from a conventional push-bike; you have a point, except they they were not using the push-bike, they were driving a car.

The reference point for fitness gain (if fitness, and not transportation, is the end goal) cannot be whatever one considers to be the "ideal" (which probably isn't cycling, it might be a rolling elliptical, or jogging with a rucksack full of stones). The reference point needs to be what the person was doing.

Caretaker

OK back OT.

The only thing I ask gratis from a bar or cafe stop on a tour is a fill of tap water and the use of the toilet/restroom but if we get loads of Ebikers asking to charge their batteries the goodwill of the hospitality industry will inevitably become strained.

No automobile status appeal in the U.S.? Really?

350htrr

The topic; What can the E-Assist option bring to bicycle touring... Basically more people...

1; More older people with some problems, but with determination to not let it stop them...
2: More working and don't have the time to do a longer tour people but want to...
3; More people who just need a bit of help to actually get out there and make it fun...
4; More people who just got out of shape and need a crutch for al little while then start to do it on their own...
5; More "Lazy" people who just maybe aren't as "lazy" as they may seem...
6;

onbike 1939

I think that these people will bring the country to its knees and you are right to be worried.

Mind you.....begging for some free water and then a free pee is not going to help.

jefnvk

Hate to burst your bubble, most people I see on plain old leg assisted bikes aren't getting any sort of workout or gain comparable to the folks on this site (claim to) get either. A mile to the ice cream shack and back is probably a long ride to most of the folks I see out exercising on beach cruisers on the MUPs, the fact that they are pedaling doesn't really mean they are getting much of a workout, certainly no more measurable of one than they would on an ebike. From my informal talking to folks in the parking lot and the bar on the other end, most consider my 7.8 mile one way ride to the brewery to be farther than they'd ever go.

Happy Feet

I work at a facility that employs 600. Number of regular bike riders I see on day shift.. 3. Many say they might ride but distances are too great and road conditions too unsafe. A larger e bike contribution might make distances seem reasonable and add to the advocacy for bike lanes. Or I could just tell them they should work harder to get to work like I do.

Rob_E

A couple of years ago I separated my Raleigh Twenty into pieces, put it in a suitcase, flew to Cincinnati. Re-assembled my bike, put a trailer frame on my suitcase, and spent a few days biking and camping around southern and central Ohio before reversing the process in Columbus.

It was a bike tour. A short one, a slow one, but still a bike tour, and, like other bike trips I have made, I used information gleaned from the Touring section of the forums to complete the trip. I also use the folding bike forum, because it has lots of relevant info on traveling with a folding bike and on modifying and repairing my particular model of bike. Of course my particular bike is rather old, so some info I found that helped me out was not folding-bike-specific, and I actually found it in the Classic & Vintage section or sometimes the Bicycle Mechanics section. I've also done a fair amount of research on trailers using the Utility section. Oh, and I'm fat. Sometimes if I'm worried that my choice of equipment is incompatible with my weight, I pop into Clydesdale section. And while there's plenty of discussion in the touring section about the logistics of flying to your touring destination, it is also something that comes up a bit on the Living Car Free section.

And, of course, while I like read about, think about, and plan trips around bike touring, most of my bike travel is actually commuting, which I do on the same bikes I tour on, so there's relevant info to be found in the Commuting section even if the bike I'm discussing is a Long Haul Trucker with front and rear racks. And a dynamo hub, which is more popular for commuting than touring, but which I find handy because I can use it to charge my phone, a subject that gets a lot of attention in the Electronics, Lighting, & Gadgets section.

I feel like bikeforums is pretty well sub-divided, and if there's an issue I want to discuss, I can usually figure out the best section to ask. And I've found that the moderators do a pretty good job of moving topics where they belong. Someone who's used to posting in the touring section might ask a question that actually has everything to do with getting to work on their bike, and nothing to do with touring, and *poof* it gets moved to the commuting section. Or someone points out that the commuting section will have better info, and the OP goes to ask their question there. Some questions quite clearly straddle a line. You might get helpful and different perspectives by asking in more than one place.

I think we lose more than we gain by putting up some sort of "E-bikers keep out" sign on the touring section. You want to talk about bike-friendly camping gear, how to pick a route, what seat you can be comfortable on all day, these topics don't change much depending on whether your bike has a pedal-assist. If I did ride an e-bike, I wouldn't go to the e-bike section to ask how to keep perishable food fresh on a multi-day trip. It wouldn't make sense. And I probably wouldn't come to the touring section to discuss new battery technology or where to recharge.

Unlike CrazyGuy, a site which I love, Bike Forums has an electric bike section which, to my mind, means that e-bikes fall under whatever definition of "bike" the site uses, or at least that they accept the idea, as I do, that there may be significant overlap between issues faced by human-powered bike riders and e-assist bike riders. So I really don't see why there'd be any kind of ban on the discussion of e-bikes in this section. It should, however, be the case, as it is with any topic, that if the subject matter puts in more squarely in the purview of another section, it should be moved.

Personally I think the subject of how e-assist can change bike touring is a subject that would be at home in either touring or e-bikes, and to that end, I'll try to answer the original question, so that I've already added to the 10 page thread-jack that largely ignores the original post.

For me, the limiting factor in touring is time. If endurance cycling were my thing, I could ride longer and go further, but it's not. I've made a couple of trips from my house to the coast, a couple hundred miles, and I've found that the trip is more enjoyable if I can break the days up smaller. In fact, the first time I tried to make the trip, I just couldn't see how it could be done in the amount of vacation time I had available without turning it from a pleasant tour to a grueling endurance test. So the first time I considered the trip, I eventually abandoned the idea. Likewise my closest family member lives 130 miles away. It's a trip I'd prefer to do over two days. And then there's the return. Four days, with an afternoon in the middle to visit my family. Not a bad way to spend four days, but it eats into my vacation time. By extending my range a bit, I could turn it into a weekend's diversion. With a suitably powered e-bike, I could see doing this. If I could get 1.5 days of travel out of 1 day of pedaling, I could get out there more often, which would be great. Of course I don't have a lot of those types of situations, and I'm afraid an e-bike wouldn't get enough use to justify the purchase, but if I had one, I could see the use of it in touring. In fact, distance travel is the most compelling issue that makes me think about an e-bike. A local company, Organic Transit | Exercise Your Power! ELF Solar Pedal Power, makes an e-bike with a solar panel that is very tempting apart from the fact that I don't have enough cause to use it, but in a situation where recharging wasn't a hardship, it seems like you could extend your touring range quite a bit. Someone else will surely consider that cheating, but if the alternative to cheating is sitting at home, then I say cheat away.

Caretaker

1. That's me.
2. Then do a shorter one.
3. They need an E powered cattle prod.
4. They'll never do it on their own.
5. They are as lazy as they seem.
6. I know, it's hard to think of anything Ebikes bring to cycle touring.

Happy Feet

Thank you for presenting your side of the discussion.
Nothing this morning could have made me happier to be in total disagreement with you.
I think I'm going to have a great day assisting people to walk and I think they will be happy with the assistance.
None of us will talk about what you think.
Cheers!

jefnvk

I'm glad since your mind is closed to anything but what you know, there can obviously be no use for something you hate to any one else

How is this for what they bring: someone who is spending their money on their equipment for their tour to accomplish their goals is really none of my business to criticize?

I'm glad 10 pages of discussion has proven nothing other than this subforum is full of people with nothing better to do than hate on others for doing something different than them.

Happy Feet

Well to be fair, it has also illustrated some good stories from people who do use assistive technology and shown that most people don't care one way or the other as long as the discussion revolves around touring.

My take is the same as well as thinking that, if someone has a disability and an e bike is the only way they can tour, why not let them be a part of the family.

NeilGunton

Some hard truths that I think some people need to hear:

This is not supposed to be a forum catering to, and centered around, people with disabilities. It is supposed to be about bicycle touring.

This is not supposed to be a forum for talk about motorized travel. It is supposed to be about bicycle touring.

Is it ok to include people who tour by motorcycle here? If not, why not?

If you think it's ok for motorcycle tours and issues here, then I think most members would disagree with you.

And if you think motorcycle touring is not ok here, then that means you DO have some line in the sand. So what is that line, exactly? And what happens when someone with disabilities falls just over that line and gets excluded? Because, as you well know, the world is full of shades of gray. So do you just keep moving that line every time a sob story happens and someone else with a disability wants to be included? If so, then you end up in a place where anything goes, basically. Any form of motorized travel, because to include x (where x is some degree of motorization), then that means it would be "unfair" to exclude x+1. So if we say now that it needs to be only able to provide n watts of power, tomorrow someone will come along touting their new e-bike that provides n+1 watts, asking why they can't be included. And if you say that you have to be able to provide x percent of the effort by pedaling, then inevitably someone will come along crying about how they need a bike that lets them provide x-1 percent, otherwise they can't get out there. And it will go on and on, and eventually the bikes will improve to the point where you'll have people here who are essentially providing none of the effort, because turning the pedals will be optional. And is that what this forum is supposed to be about?

Trying to say that a little motor is ok is like saying you're a little bit pregnant. It's either there or it's not. How much motor is ok? That question has been asked, but nobody has answered. If we use some legal definition, then which one? And as motors and batteries get better, what then? The goal posts will keep moving.

And what happens as the technology improves, and people who have no disability start using the equipment just because it's easier than pedaling? What would "bicycle tour" mean then? Some people seem to believe that the term has no meaning, but I am one who thinks it does have meaning. The main thing that differentiates us from motorbike touring is the effort required to do what we do. Some are trying to browbeat us into submission by pretending that the effort part is meaningless, and if we mention it at all then we're suddenly being overly competitive and focused on comparing ourselves to others. Are we really ok with this politically correct tripe?

Are we saying that we just don't care? Then why have a "bicycle touring" forum at all? Why have anything focused on a particular activity, because almost by definition there will always be some people who have some disability that means they can't do that physical activity. So is it inevitable that the social justice warriors always eventually move in and start going "Hang on, this isn't fair, we need to include everybody", and nobody feels like they can argue with that for fear of being labeled a Great Big Meanie, and so what was formerly a nice focused forum becomes diluted to the point of uselessness.

Not everybody can bicycle tour. This doesn't make those of us who want to keep the forum about human powered bicycle touring heartless, it just means we came here to see discussions about a certain thing that requires the physical ability to pedal a bicycle, and don't want to be browbeaten into accepting that it should be about something else due to sob stories.

It is sad that disabilities is being used as a wedge argument here, and that if we believe that "bicycle touring" is about, well, bicycles, then we are being somehow "closed minded". I believe being open minded is fine, but I try not to be so open minded that my brain falls out.

There are a few individuals here who appear to be more motivated by trigger issues about people with disabilities than bicycle touring itself. If you allow these people to force their own definition of bicycle touring on us via "think of the children" type arguments, then the whole idea of bicycle touring will ultimately be diluted to the point of being meaningless.

Do I really have to be the one to say this out loud? You have to have a certain level of physical ability in order to be able to do a bicycle tour. If you are disabled or have some medical condition that means you can no longer pedal your bicycle, and need a motor, then that is no longer bicycle touring. It's motorized touring. And if I am ever in that unfortunate position, then I promise I won't try to come here and change the definitions to suit myself. I'll go somewhere more appropriate, and I'm sure that as time passes and e-bikes get better and more capable, there will be forums to cater to their specific issues. And I'm equally sure that slowly, over time people here on this forum will start to question why on earth motorized bikes are part of the discussion here at all. And they will go back through the archives, and discover exactly how the frog was boiled.

Neil

Happy Feet

Neil... no one needs to hear your "hard" truths. We are not children and you are not the teacher. You are just one voice among many and your version of "truth" bears as much weight as anyone else's. Nothing hard about it.

Use of terms like "browbeat, political tripe, social justice warriors, sob stories, think of the children type stories etal doesn't make your opinion any more reasonable. It just makes you seem like a warrior type of your own browbeating us with sob stories about how we should think of the poor bicycle children having to share their playground. See how the derogatory gets turned around.

You like to throw that "social justice warrior" phrase around a lot in your retorts like it's a bad thing. By the accompanying language I assume you have issues with issues in general and feel frustrated you can't just ban those who hold a contrary opinion here. That sucks! But I can't think of an issue more worth fighting for than social justice. I'd rather that than be a warrior in defense of maintaining the traditional definition of "bicycle" on a forum. Especially since we have already hashed out the fact that there are many definitions of bicycle in effect and that Bike Forums already acknowledges E bikes as such with their own sub forum. It must mean they regard E bikes as a form of bicycle. And, so far, it also appears they support the idea of being inclusive in the touring forum. It seems you are fighting a lost battle.

As to looking through archives down the road to see how a discussion or two ruined a forum and boiled a frog; have you looked at your own site and seen how that e bike article from 2007 has changed the tone? Or will you go back and redact it a case of revisionist history to avoid admitting that nothing "wedge like" resulted.

Here you go https://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/?doc_id=2173

Rob_E

I don't understand what fears/concerns are at play here. There is a forum for e-bikes. Issues that apply exclusively to e-bikes will likely continue to be discussed there. There are lots of people who don't bike tour the way I bike tour. Heck, most of the information I gain from this forum and share on this forum is not actually from what I consider bike touring. Most of my trips are out-and-back camping trips: bike somewhere, set up camp, stay there for a night, a weekend, a week, then bike home. I'm not "touring" anything most trips. Just retreading the same areas I've been before. But this forum has been very valuable in planning those trips. And those trips have been very helpful in preparing for the longer trips that I have taken.

Sometimes I open a thread, and start to read, and think, "Wow, I would never want to tour on tires so thin." or "There's no way I could get by with so little gear." and then I read on to find that they are not camping but staying in hotels. Maybe they have even made arrangements to have other gear sent ahead so they don't have to carry it. Maybe they have a SAG vehicle. So I think. "Well that's not real touring." And so I:

• Add to their thread my personal opinions about why they are not really touring.
• Move on to the next thread.
• Look to see if their question/issue has anything in common with my experiences and reply in kind.

It's never the first one. You're not doing it the way I would. Big deal. We still might have things to discuss. How to plan a route ; what makes a good repair kit ; what to do about dogs. These are issues we might both deal with. There is plenty of common ground. If this hypothetical motorcycle rider comes on to talk about how much you need to carry for tolls on the interstate, then I would expect that they would be told that they're in the wrong place. If they came on and asked about tents that they could fit in their saddle bags, I would probably say, "We call them 'panniers' around here, and here's what I use..." The experience translates. The knowledge translates. And some people love talking about their gear, and some days that's me.

I guess some of us have narrower definitions of what this forum is about. I wouldn't say that this forum is supposed to be about bike touring. I would say it's supposed to be about bike touring and bike touring related issues. Yes, if your bike has a motor, you are going to have a different experience than me. But if you're trying to strap a tent on to your handlebars, then maybe we have something in common to discuss. If we just say, "You have an e-bike? You're in the wrong place." we might miss out on some insights.

jefnvk

Shouldn't the hard truths about what is and is not allowed here come from someone with a blue star next to their name

And @RobE beat me to the answer on the theoretical motorcycle question, and general handling of topics that don't concern me too.

NeilGunton

Yeah, that article went up way before e-bikes was really a thing that was on my radar. I can't remember now what discussion was had at the time with the author, to be honest. It was almost ten years ago. E-bikes were still in their infancy back then, and not really a very reasonable option for touring. Too short a range, too limited, too heavy. But they are getting better and better, and will continue to do so, and the lines will keep getting more and more blurry, except for one: Whether or not there is a motor on the bike. Any motor. That is an easy line to draw, and one that is really very clear to everybody, I think. Gears don't matter, number of wheels on the bike doesn't matter, as long as you are the one putting in all the work, then that counts for the purposes of "bicycle touring".

As for people not caring about what I say... I might ask in response, why should anybody care what YOU say? How much bicycle touring have you done yourself? What gives you the credentials to be able to come here and dictate to us as a community what it is and isn't about? It seems to me that you're perhaps one of those people who come here to do their little bucket list tour, and gets all fired up about it for the period before it, and then you go do your tour and we never hear from you again. In the meantime, we have to put up with your social justice warrior BS as if it actually means something, because otherwise we hate puppies or disabled kids or whatever.

This website is run by Internet Brands. I doubt they care all that much one way or the other about splitting hairs regarding what constitutes bicycle touring, as long as people are coming here and they are getting page views, I'm sure they are very happy indeed. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if they came down on your side, since it's an easy call on the surface (being more inclusive is always good, right?), and it would mean more guaranteed discussions like this one, which is undoubtedly the most active recent thread by far in terms of views. I am a person who cares about definitions, though, to the extent that I will make certain arguments even though I am probably losing some readership and some members through my policies on crazyguyonabike.

That said, if a moderator here tells me to go pound sand, then I will do so. In the meantime, I feel there are legitimate arguments to be made against having motorized bikes come into these discussions on this particular forum.

The fact that you have to jump on every post here regarding e-bikes as if it's your own personal Jihad tells me that you are someone with issues. According to your blog, you are a physical rehabilitation assistant who appears to be triggered by anything that might smell of "unfairness". Well, I have news for you: The world is not fair. I can't do everything I used to do, but I don't try to go around changing the world to cater to me as a result. I accept that not everybody can do every activity under the sun. My personal interest is bicycle touring and what that means, which is entirely on-topic for this forum. Your issue seems to be people with disabilities being able to arbitrarily dictate definitions, based on "but why can't everybody be included", which is actually kind of a toxic attitude to have on any focused forum - because you are basically arguing for the destruction of the very focus that makes the forum interesting to a lot of people.

Incidentally, I notice that your replies always seem to ignore the specific arguments I made regarding the slippery slope of "if we allow n watts, when why not n+1 watts" and "if we require that the bike only provide x percent assistance, then why not x+1 percent". Because there will always be another person who isn't able to deal with whatever arbitrary line you put in place. So, based on your own logic, the line will keep on moving, in the name of inclusiveness. Once you allow motors of any kind then that progression will march onward as technology improves, until we are at the point where the bike has pedals, but the pedaling is an entirely optional activity. And I am arguing that this is not bicycle touring (or even cycling, come to that) when a perfectly able person can buy an e-bike and go out for a ride while doing no work at all, then the inevitable, absurd end of this trend will have been realized. And people will realize just how insidious these "think of the children" arguments were, way back when.

I'm not going to bother responding to every post here, unlike you I have learned over time that arguments on the internet get very tiresome after a while when you have certain individuals who feel like they're on a mission from God to always get the last word in. I used to be more like that, but over time you live and learn. So go for it, I may pop back in occasionally as the mood strikes me but otherwise I hope that maybe some of the silent majority who are no doubt reading this thread might jump in and try doing some of the work. Come on people, it's not just entertainment - if you have an opinion, post it. Don't let dweebs like me be the only ones putting ourselves out there as punching bags.

Neil

MixedRider

You are correct! But your are not seeing the forest from the trees.

I think everyone is saying the same thing.

XXX-bicycle touring!

Mountain-bicycle touring!
Road-bicycle touring!
Singlespeed-bicycle touring!
Recumbent-bicycle touring!
Cyclocross-bicycle touring!
Triathlon/time-trial-bicycle touring!
Hand-bicycle touring!
Hybrid-bicycle touring!
Touring-bicycle touring!
Electric-Assist-bicycle touring!

Everyone will have a different take on the "ideal tour" for themselves. If using an XXX-bicycle is not your idea of an ideal tour, then don't use XXX-bicycle.

Bike touring is a very personal and rewarding experience. Touring solely on my-own power is the preferred xxx-bicycle to maximize the rewarding part for myself. If someone else chooses a electric-assist bicycle, I will not criticize what the other person did, but I am proud of myself for not using an electric-assist motor.

If the touring post is not solely about the "bicycle" what difference does it make if it is in the touring forum or not?

The unspoken agreement on posts in this forum is the tour would require using an XXX-bicycle. If the XXX-bicycle is electric-assist and was legally allowed to be used in the manner it was, so be it. If I find I don't like where/how electric-assist bicycles are being used, I will reach out to local organizations, my congressman, representative, etc... to change and/or comment on the laws around electric-assist-bicycles.

NeilGunton

Um, no they're not.

One of these things is not like the others... all but the last item can be lumped together under the "self powered bicycle" category. The last item is really a category unto itself, i.e. "motorized bikes". Of course categorization is a tricky field at times, but it's something I have quite a bit of experience with.

People are asking me why I care about such things... I have been running a bicycle touring website for the last 16 years. Not just "a" bicycle touring website, but one of the largest in the world in terms of content (not to blow my own horn, but I'm not aware of any other websites with over 12,000 journals and articles dedicated to bicycle touring). And not to use this as an "argument from authority", but I think it is valid to say that I have probably been required to think deeper and harder than most about what is and what isn't appropriate for such a site. Every day, people try to post stuff that clearly isn't appropriate (e.g. just the other day I had to delete a new user who thought it would be just fine to post on my forum about garden furniture). There are clear cases, but where it gets really fun is the gray areas like e-bikes. I think it's fair to say that I have put a great deal of thought into that over the years. Also, as an object-oriented software developer since the mid 1980's, my brain is perhaps naturally hard wired to consider taxonomies, categories, types, sub-types and suchlike. Perhaps that, combined with a love of language, and running crazyguyonabike, and having to make daily decisions about what's appropriate for those 16 years, maybe this has made me especially sensitive to this stuff. In any case, I think I am making a reasonable argument that is hard to refute.

Neil