pedals2slowly wrote:Didn't get an email. is this for all members or just the select few??
I didn't get an email on the 8th, when the OP posted. I did get one this morning (Sat 16th), which I'm filling in now. What's also noticeable is that the questions don't seem to correspond to the OP's. For instance, Q1 for me is about other types of "fitness activity" (I think that was the phrase) I take part in (though these "fitness activities" include camping and caravaning... ). There is a question about bike types but it's Q2 and has far more than 5 options (including a "Other type" option). So either they're sending different surveys to different people, or they've already taken on board criticism and altered the questions in the space of a week.
Not quite. Turns out these are two different questionnaires about two different things, each sent to different subsets of members. The first is broadly about how to market Cycling UK, and the second is asking about a new membership package.
(a local member asked Cycling UK and this was the answer that they got back)
I filled it in. It didn't mention (AFAICS) the forum as one way of having used CUK. So I added it.
I also added "Using a bike to get somewhere" as an option for how you use a bike (fitness, commuting etc). Shopping was offered. But I find it quite extraordinary that the primary reason for the existence of the bicycle wasn't mentioned (at least I didn't spot it). Today I have just got back from visiting family - part train, part bike. This is weird. Maybe it says something about how CUK views cycling. I hope not.
My over-riding response was that I felt sorry for CUK. I can see what they want to do and I understand that people's inertia is a barrier to cycling, so some encouragement is in order. But most of what they want to do is almost impossible in the face of implacable opposition from the motoring lobby and complete indifference, misunderstanding and outright hostility from government. So their aims are platitudes - or as someone said upthread, motherhood and apple pie. That doesn't make CUK pointless, far from it. These aspirations are laudable but unrealistic to the point of being misleading. Campaign it must, try it must, make lots of inputs it must: the efforts of CUK aren't wasted but this survey was wishful thinking. It reminded me of the cancer charities' campaigns: let's beat cancer in the nineties, er, soon etc.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
Sounds like I got the 2nd Survey this weekend - all about membership benefits. It was a little fiddly to fill out, as the format kept changing [Pick 1 .... rank these ... Pick 3 ... rate these ... repeat at random ... ]
When they asked who would make a good "Partner" I gave the Green Party.
Dunno if that was the sort of group they were looking for ...
mattheus wrote: When they asked who would make a good "Partner" I gave the Green Party.
Dunno if that was the sort of group they were looking for ...
Probably BP or Shell I would have thought.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
backnotes wrote:Not quite. Turns out these are two different questionnaires about two different things, each sent to different subsets of members. The first is broadly about how to market Cycling UK, and the second is asking about a new membership package.
(a local member asked Cycling UK and this was the answer that they got back)
I initially ignored the second questionnaire, thinking that it was the first one repeated by mistake. It was very confusing. It should have been clear that it was a different questionnaire. I've completed it, but probably out of time now. They'll have to do it again.
I got the marketing one. It was almost enough to cancel my membership. All I got from it was my membership is worth no more to Cycling UK than being a marketable commodity. What happened to the CTC values “To promote, assist and protect the use of bicycles, tricycles and other similar vehicles on the public roads.”
danhopgood wrote:What happened to the CTC values “To promote, assist and protect the use of bicycles, tricycles and other similar vehicles on the public roads.”
Nothing in the new objects about using members as a marketing opportunity for advertisers.
I for one am quite happy to pay more for membership to avoid being treated as a commodity. I made comment to that effect in the survey response. I suspect most people minded the same as me would have abandoned the survey way before the opportunity came up to add comments though....
