Cycling UK Forum

Dear Mick (Spambuster /Cornwall

Friendly request.Please restore the initial heading and delete the word clickbait. I can see why a spam buster might be initially tempted to add the word clickbait. That is fully justified.When you read my follow on post WITH A FULLER EXPLANATION there are actually serious issue for Cycling UK TO THINK ABOUT IN THE FUTURE. Your of course alternatively perfectly welcome to give a full and reasoned response to your own idea's for maintaining funding c2030.Reducing all the programmes maybe?. The truth is no financial model will predict the future and no one knows. When the best Mathematicians toyed with Gaussian functions and significant deviations in 2008 we all know what happened. CUK member's cannot afford to be complacent.

briansnail wrote:Why so silent? I was expecting a robust response to my rely to previous posts!

A massive single block of text is a nightmare to read. I gave-up after a few lines. It's a typical style of Russian bridge inhabitants. Also appears as an automated system with things like "POST" at the bottom making it further appear an automated post.

Maybe of use https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/topics/zvwwxnb/articles/z9n73k7

Ian

Titles :
Your clickbait titles don't fool anyone. Some might find them off-putting / annoying.

Presentation :
At the very least use appropriate spacing in your text. Nobody is going to read a huge block of endless sentences.

There is an EDIT button, which will permit you to correct any of your previous posts. Both the title & text.

^ I hope that this helps.

The original post is certainly hard to read and to take in - better formatting might yield more responses. (Reminiscent of a previous inhabitant of these elysian fields)
While I don't agree with the premise it's a discussion worth having.

CUK / CTC needs to look to the future that is without doubt, but I would assert that the organisation doesn't have a clear direction currently on which to build that base. Since the charity conversion CTC/CUK has appeared to wander aimlessly around the world of cycling without any direction or aim. Until that direction is sorted out, then the view to the future cannot be plotted out.
I disagree that an international perspective is appropriate. Firstly, CTC/CUK cannot seem to get it's head around UK-wide cycling issues, so how could it hope to have a much wider perspective? Secondly, if (and it's a big if), the organisation were to campaign internationally - where is the commonality? There is diversity in regulation, and diversity in riders' approach to those regulations. Thirdly - the political position of the UK at the moment makes it a very poor base for any organisation to garner respect internationally -we are becoming a pariah state (that is a fact, not an opinion).
As stated elsewhere the influence of CTC/CUK within the ECF is where the effort needs to be expended to give the international perspective that the OP seems to want - the ECF is a respected body, and my feeling is that the UK's influence has waned in recent years (based on little evidence, admittedly).
I would prefer to see the organisation revert to being a 'touring club' but I admit that boat has sailed, and no amount of nostalgia is going to get it back into port.
There are no easy answers to what the future direction should be but a modern charity is a lot more than its website and magazine.

No.

soapbox wrote:No.

You put a persuasive case.

My first reaction to the original post was not positive. In deed I too regret the conversion from the CTC to Cycling UK, though of course there are valid arguments that support one large voice for cycling rather than many small ones. A further dilution in direction from my core interests isn’t helpful to me.

There are cycling organisations in many other countries and cycling U.K. should not be competing with them for members and our focus should be on the U.K. Other large organisations were mentioned as having overseas branches. U.K. Accountants and Engineers have professional bodies with branches and local recognition overseas, but their structure is to support U.K. trained professionals in their overseas use of professional U.K. standards, UK training and U.K. recognised International Standards.

Overseas cyclists ride in very different ways to those in the U.K.. The roads they use, the rules of the road, the journey types, local culture, etc., etc. are all different and we in this country don’t have the expertise to support them; it is an entirely different situation from the U.K. professional bodies mentioned supporting their overseas members.

Personally I feel that Cycling UK has enough to do in this country and that that is where it should focus its efforts. I believe that Cycling UK’s biggest challenge is to influence UK society such that active transport is both viewed as and is a practical option for a much larger percentage of the UK’s population. By all means enable cyclists from other countries to gain from our knowledge base and us from theirs but certainly do not divert at all from the focused provision of service to the U.K. Focus is important, without it individuals and organisations achieve little and with it they achieve much.

Diversity among cyclists in the same country is great too
Perhaps cuk should ally with other cyclist organisations from countries where one rides on the left
Why is there no visible world lobby? There is the uci for cyclesport

briansnail wrote:Why so silent? I was expecting a robust response to my rely to previous posts!

I too would encourage you to make your text more readable. It’s a shame that your comments simply won’t be read by others when, with a bit of effort on your part, you could enable the communication process to work. Why not use the edit function to rework your post such that others can readily identify the points you are trying to make?

It's encouraging to see that the OP has reformatted the post, and changed the title of the thread.
Maybe now we'll get some constructive discussion.

I'm a trendy consumer. Just look at my wobbly using hovercraft full of eels.

AndyK wrote:

soapbox wrote:No.

You put a persuasive case.

A simple answer to a complicated question.

Carlton green wrote:My first reaction to the original post was not positive. In deed I too regret the conversion from the CTC to Cycling UK, though of course there are valid arguments that support one large voice for cycling rather than many small ones. A further dilution in direction from my core interests isn’t helpful to me.

There are cycling organisations in many other countries and cycling U.K. should not be competing with them for members and our focus should be on the U.K. Other large organisations were mentioned as having overseas branches. U.K. Accountants and Engineers have professional bodies with branches and local recognition overseas, but their structure is to support U.K. trained professionals in their overseas use of professional U.K. standards, UK training and U.K. recognised International Standards.

Overseas cyclists ride in very different ways to those in the U.K.. The roads they use, the rules of the road, the journey types, local culture, etc., etc. are all different and we in this country don’t have the expertise to support them; it is an entirely different situation from the U.K. professional bodies mentioned supporting their overseas members.

Personally I feel that Cycling UK has enough to do in this country and that that is where it should focus its efforts. I believe that Cycling UK’s biggest challenge is to influence UK society such that active transport is both viewed as and is a practical option for a much larger percentage of the UK’s population. By all means enable cyclists from other countries to gain from our knowledge base and us from theirs but certainly do not divert at all from the focused provision of service to the U.K. Focus is important, without it individuals and organisations achieve little and with it they achieve much.

+1

soapbox wrote:

Carlton green wrote:.................Personally I feel that Cycling UK has enough to do in this country and that that is where it should focus its efforts. I believe that Cycling UK’s biggest challenge is to influence UK society such that active transport is both viewed as and is a practical option for a much larger percentage of the UK’s population. By all means enable cyclists from other countries to gain from our knowledge base and us from theirs but certainly do not divert at all from the focused provision of service to the U.K. Focus is important, without it individuals and organisations achieve little and with it they achieve much.

+1

Make that +2