this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2023
182 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15993 readers
2 users here now

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

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] prismaTK@hexbear.net 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I’m pretty strongly against motorized vehicles on bike paths unless necessitated for accessibility.

[–] Mardoniush@hexbear.net 35 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] infuziSporg@hexbear.net 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

You know who is, though? Joe Biden.

You know who else is?

[–] prismaTK@hexbear.net 7 points 2 years ago

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. snipes-hesitation

[–] prismaTK@hexbear.net 4 points 2 years ago

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

[–] Ram_The_Manparts@hexbear.net 20 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

What difference does it make if e-bikes are restricted to a speed that the average "analog" bike can easily do though?

[–] prismaTK@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)
  1. these speed limits are easily circumvented and some bikes are designed to make that possible
  2. the acceleration of an e-bike is way higher, which means that riders can get going at very high speeds in tight spaces where regular bikers couldn’t.

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.

[–] Ram_The_Manparts@hexbear.net 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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