Bowlofsalad,
LOL! I'm not bitter in the least about anything, especially since all of my ebikes get the same legal treatment as any pedal bike, with one exception. Because my motors enable me to attain the minimum speed, I can legally ride on the highway while a cyclist cannot, so I enjoy greater freedom. Now that you want to invoke the actual derivation and meaning of words, bicycle means it has two wheels, and there's no requirement for pedals based on the name. Even though it's just a legal definition thing, bicycle is broadly accepted to mean a pedal bike, so if you want to exclude others based on your prejudices and call yours an e-bicycle, go for it.
Bike on the other hand is too generic for pedalists to claim as their own. That would make them the only "bikers", which obviously won't work. No, a bike has 2 wheels, regardless of propulsion. I have called all of my bikes "bikes". My pedal bikes were and are bikes. My motorcycles were all bikes, and all of my ebikes are bikes. I add the "e" to make it ebike, when I want to specifically point out the electric propulsion. I actually have pedals with crank arms on all of my ebikes. I prefer the variable foot position compared to pegs. I generally don't have chains on them, mainly because I don't like the noise of a FW, and because of the potential of a FW failure at speed could cause the pedals to instantly go from 0 rpm to wheel rpm.
No, my ebikes aren't motorcycles, they're just ebikes, close cousins, but no. To say otherwise is like saying a sports car ceases to be a car because it's capable of too high a speed, or it has too much horsepower. Even pedal bikes are capable of pretty extreme speed. Look at records set by drafting a car, or installing an aerodynamic shell, or simply pointing it down a steep hill, but it doesn't make them motorcycles despite what their human motor can do. The biologic motor of racing cyclists can easily exceed the output of what is legal for an ebike to retain bicycle treatment in almost every country with restrictive laws for ebikes, but that doesn't make them motorcycles. The lack of consistency and common sense in these laws is ridiculous, yet many here adopt the legal definitions as their own, though most seem to reject Australia's.
Stop giving the poor scooter ebike riders such a hard time. They're no less safe for people around them. Is it jealously about being protected from spray off the tires on wet roads, or being mostly out of the wind when its cold? Those advantages are nothing compared to the cavernous battery boxes they have, plus protected storage under the seat, and often behind the front faring too. Don't tell me it's just based on their looks...Aren't you ashamed of yourself for being a bigot?...and against a fellow EVer no less. I think I'll start assigning designations, Chalo1, Chalo2, Chalo3, etc.
The real problem with classifications is that it prevents the manufacture of what are arguably the most useful and practical vehicles. They that fall in that no man's land somewhere between motorcycles and bicycles. The motorcycle manufacturers don't want to build them due to product liability concerns related to extremely light vehicles and the fact that mopeds have never become broadly popular. The bicycle manufacturers won't do it either, because too many want them to be classified as a motor vehicle from a legal standpoint. The government doesn't want them, because they'd end up in some moped classification with very minimal fees.
