BoTM Bike of the month October 2023 - now taking entries

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

I don’t think it’s a can of worms. I think it’s reasonable if it’s materially different. So that it’s not the same bike.

You still have the right to decide.

In this case it’s clearly not the same bike; so saying that you can’t enter a bike if it’s materially different I feel goes against the fine recycling and reusing ethos that underpins this fine community.

Ultimately if people feel it’s the same bike they they don’t have to vote.

I’m just asking for a sense of pragmatism.

No, you want to bend the rules to suit you. You've been told no, withdraw with grace.

 

[Matttymm]

No, you want to bend the rules to suit you. You've been told no, withdraw with grace.

It’s not just to suit me. The rules aren’t specific as I’ve said.

Sometimes change is good and new ideas bring increased fulfilment and happiness.

 

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

It’s not just to suit me. The rules aren’t specific as I’ve said.

Sometimes change is good and new ideas bring increased fulfilment and happiness.

I agree the rules may not be specific. The mods have ruled though, which for me is the end of it. If you wish to argue the decision that is of course your prerogative.

 

[raidan73]

The decision has been made but that's not to say it can never be questioned; we're not running a dictatorship here!

In thinking it over I questioned where the line would be drawn (and the question is rhetorical!). Should we made a list of how many components have been replaced against how many components have been retained and work out the cut for eligibility based on that? Should we allow it if the replaced list is longer than the retained list, or should larger components carry a heavier weighting so people don't just replace things like ferrules, cable crimps and inner tubes just to make their list longer. And, in the fairness of being balanced, would we accept an entry if a cracked frame was replaced with an identical one with all the same parts retained? These are all the kinds of things we would argue about, and we would - we're a bunch of pedants here! It's hard to cover every eventuality, hence rule 13 I guess.

 

[grantoury]

The decision has been made but that's not to say it can never be questioned; we're not running a dictatorship here!

In thinking it over I questioned where the line would be drawn (and the question is rhetorical!). Should we made a list of how many components have been replaced against how many components have been retained and work out the cut for eligibility based on that? Should we allow it if the replaced list is longer than the retained list, or should larger components carry a heavier weighting so people don't just replace things like ferrules, cable crimps and inner tubes just to make their list longer. And, in the fairness of being balanced, would we accept an entry if a cracked frame was replaced with an identical one with all the same parts retained? These are all the kinds of things we would argue about, and we would - we're a bunch of pedants here! It's hard to cover every eventuality, hence rule 13 I guess.

I think it is perfectly reasonable to say that the same frame is the same bike. When I rebuild a "bike" and replace everything on it, to me it is still the same "bike". Also perfectly reasonable to stick to coherent rules for the botm.

 

[Matttymm]

The decision has been made but that's not to say it can never be questioned; we're not running a dictatorship here!

In thinking it over I questioned where the line would be drawn (and the question is rhetorical!). Should we made a list of how many components have been replaced against how many components have been retained and work out the cut for eligibility based on that? Should we allow it if the replaced list is longer than the retained list, or should larger components carry a heavier weighting so people don't just replace things like ferrules, cable crimps and inner tubes just to make their list longer. And, in the fairness of being balanced, would we accept an entry if a cracked frame was replaced with an identical one with all the same parts retained? These are all the kinds of things we would argue about, and we would - we're a bunch of pedants here! It's hard to cover every eventuality, hence rule 13 I guess.

Thank you for considering my opinion. I genuinely appreciate it.

I would suggest at the absolute discretion of the MODs rule 13), I think if it’s a material change to the bike then it should be allowed.

Naturally changing tyres or cables isn’t really material nor materially impacts the bike.

Trying to have a definitive rule, I.e number of parts or quantity of parts or value is perhaps a little over pedantic, but having some leeway at the Mods discretion is a fair model. I implore the application of a bit of common sense and pragmatism.

At the end of the day, if people feel strongly enough about the MOD’s decision then they can either not vote or vote for an alternative. At the end of the day, its votes that count.

In my particular case I’ve spent hundreds of pounds upgrading my parts and I feel that should be welcome in the BOTM. This bike is a long way different to my previous entry.

In a competition where sometimes it’s very close, having the opportunity to significantly improve your bike and have a go gives the community an incentive to improve.

I recognise rules are rules; there is also a rule of not taking it too seriously too.

 

[wicket]

Here’s my entry…

wickets 1992 Alpinestars cro-mega dx

 

[Guinessisgoodforyou]

Here’s my entry…

wickets 1992 Alpinestars cro-mega dx

That is lovely.

 

[raidan73]

I’ll be getting out ‘old red’ when I get a chance

 

[benjabbi]

I've entered all my bikes at some point or other, most in a normal and 'special' month. Every single one of them has evolved since, parts changed/upgraded etc and every single one of them is better now in my eyes, making me think I jumped the gun a bit and should of waited. The garage isn't suddenly full of different bikes though, it's full of the same ones as before, that have all been entered and can't be again, thems the rules!