view the rest of the comments
the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
That's not really an argument against e-bikes though, it's an argument for lowering the maximum speed they're allowed to reach using assistance from the motor.
I’m pretty strongly against motorized vehicles on bike paths unless necessitated for accessibility.
The problem here is if you live in a place with hills and want bike paths to be major transportation pathways that serve double-digit percentages of the population, you need to.
Grandma is not cycling unpowered for 10 min up a 10 degree incline to get to the shops, even if she can in principle do that. As long as speed limits are enforced, it's fine to have a motor.
You know who is, though? Joe Biden.
You know who else is?
Learning that Bush is a pretty good mountain biker and would drop his secret service agents in technical sections was the only part of the W Image Rehabilitation Tour that came even close to working on me.
I’m willing to flex the bounds of accessibility, and I’m far more in favor of e-bikes on roads, but I don’t want electric mopeds on my bike paths
What difference does it make if e-bikes are restricted to a speed that the average "analog" bike can easily do though?
A better solution might be capping the power output of the rider and motor combined at something like 300W (ie a good sustained effort for a strong cyclist), and disabling power assist if the rider breaks that threshold.
This is almost exactly what is done in the country I live in and it seems to work, the only difference being that it's capped at 250w rather than 300w
So that's what I was trying to say, but I should have been clearer lol