I asked about the best interest of TGO not the best interest of the poster. How is it in the best interest of TGO to migrate in scope questions to other sites?

We don't. That question is not in scope here. Where a question is on topic here and on another site, we only migrate if it gets no attention, or the OP asks for it to move.

How is it not in scope? maintenance on outdoor equipment would seem to be inscope

Looking at all the questions your link brings up, the bike one is in a totally different space to the others. It is very specifically about bicycle maintenance - there is nothing about the outdoors in it.

SO by that argument, questions about tent maintenance, boat maintenance, ski maintenance would be out of scope as well?

No. Tents are exclusively outdoors, as are boats and skis. Also we don't have a dedicated skiing stack exchange, for example.

I would imagine questions on the maintenance of tracks down a mountain for suitability for biking down would be in scope here - just an assumption.

I ride my bike outdoors exclusively. So again how is a bike question out of scope on TGO?

@JamesJenkins Doing something outdoors does not make it automatically on topic for TGO

We have gone through this extensively in meta

And even if your bike is exclusively outdoors, it doesn't make cycling exclusively outdoors. If you ride your bike only in competitions, it does not make it automatically on topic for Sport

But it is on topic at Bicycles

I think you are trying to argue that because it is on topic at Bicycles it is not on topic at TGO. But you are not coming straight out and saying it.

This is pretty much what Aarron is also saying in his meta post.

No - I'm really saying it isn't on topic here, as it isn't about the outdoors

@JamesJenkins have a look at outdoors.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/1025/…

What there puts it out of scope? 'Contentious/Unanswered' includes 'Mountain Biking' we have a bike tag. it is not listed as out of scope.

How is it not on topic?

It's not like Bikes are in or out of scope. Your question is not about the outdoors at all. It is in scope on Bicycles. Hence the migration by @studiohack

Like I said, there will be cycling questions that are in scope - not because they are about bikes, but because they are about the outdoors

If you want to take that position then make that your answer.

@JamesJenkins no. You keep saying that, but I keep telling you that is not what I'm saying. Not sure why you keep trying to insist it is, to be honest.

It was closed because it is off topic here. It was migrated to bicycles because it is on topic there.

Then explain how it is off topic, there are no meta posts making bikes off topic as you have suggested. Bikes and skies have the same indoor usage, bows even more indoor usage then either, buy what logic is bike maintenance off topic but skies and bosw are not?

typo-- I think the plural of ski is skis not skies as I have typed multiple times

@JamesJenkins at no point have I said bike maintenance is off topic. Your specific question is off topic.

that specific question - "Adjusting derailleur with bike upside down, is it ok?" has literally nothing to do with the outdoors

@RoryAlsop I have no idea how you see it that way. Adjusting derailleur is bike maintenance. Please be specific, what makes it have nothing to do with the outdoors?

@JamesJenkins I'd suggest the other way round would be more useful - what makes you think it has something to do with the outdoors :-)

Where we are now, one mod migrated it after a couple of flags. I agree with that migration 100%.

Nothing you have said makes me think there is anything in doubt with that

Please, there are been several claims that it is out of scope, no one has given a valid argument for that. I have made repeated presentations of why it is inscope, and offered valid

@RoryAlsop every argument you have presented for it being out of scope has been unclear or inaccurate. Do you want your final argument on the point to be that because a mod made a decision that makes it correct? That is all you have left, you have backed away from every other point you have presented.

@JamesJenkins not sure where you are getting any of that from. You are not taking on board anything I have said, and in fact keep insisting I am saying the opposite of what I actually have said. And in fact you seem to be doing it deliberately and antagonistically, so this appears to be going nowhere. Feel free to talk to Studiohack instead if you want to continue, as you aren't listening to me.

@RoryAlsop I have listened to and responded appropriately to everything you said. When I ask for clarification, you are either vague or reply with an invalid argument. Frankly I find it sad, that you have chosen to try and defend an error in judgement.

You may also notice that I made the initial post on TGO META and Studiohack has not attempted to defend the choice.

Just skimmed over much of what is in here. I would just like to add to this chat that bicycling is fairly exclusively an outdoor topic, that off-road/mountain biking has little difference to hiking (and even takes place on similar trails), the original question was about gear maintenance which is known to be on-topic at TGO. I think that if it weren't for the existence of bike.SE, the only argument left against bikes-on-topic would be that biking is not exclusive to the "TGO mindset" that we...

...definitely NOT a TGO thing, but they just happen to be tools that are also used by practitioners of TGO activities - because backpacks are used by all types of people for all types of activities. But backpacks are integral tools for our TGO activities, so we decide by fiat that they are on-topic and even provide them with a tag, just because they are so important to us. Bikes are almost the same in that regard, especially for long distance TGO treks. If there were no bike.SE, it would be a...

...HUGE disservice to close bike related questions here. Even if, after all we've covered, you still want to think of bikes as "not part of TGO", I think you should at least consider 1) TGO would be far worse off for TGO practitioners who consider bikes an integral TGO tool if there were no bike.SE and bike Qs were just closed and 2) even if you disagree, everyone's opinion matters equally and it's best to err on the side of caution (ie: not closing due to your disagreeing opinion).

BUT! as long as no precedent is set by the discussion we are having here and it doesn't change how anything is handled (since we DO have bike.SE), we are mostly just wasting our time. If this discussion does set a precedent which will have some affect though, or if it is already such a precedent, then you are stirring up a hornet's nest and this will not be the end of it.

And since we keep complaining on meta about the low volume of posts, you should not want to shun any topics that anyone believes are TGO anyway, assuming there's not already a more relevant site.