Don't mention the CUK

Discussion of the re-branding of CTC as Cycling UK.
mattsccm
Posts: 2343
Joined: 28 Nov 2009, 9:44pm

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby mattsccm » 6 Apr 2016, 4:38pm

I am glad that I don't venture over here very much!
If some hopeful thinks that CUK will be ignored they need to open their eyes. Everything possible is shortened to its initials. To try to dictate how a name is used is, I assume, some vague attempt to either justify a job or expense or is possibly a wind up and deliberate attempt to mess about with the name. There is no way that it can be genuine, its just to naïve.

Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby Bicycler » 6 Apr 2016, 4:48pm

No wind up.
From the Brand Kit (pdf): http://www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default/ ... nd_kit.pdf
We are proud of our new name: Cycling UK. To grow our message and influence we need to make it as well-known as possible, it should never be abbreviated to CUK.

Grammar and apostrophes
When using our name in copy, please ensure to:
Always write the name out as Cycling UK.
Use a cap C on ‘Cycling’ (it’s not a cap on the logo but that’s a design thing; it’s our name so treat it as a title and use the cap).
Use double caps on ‘UK’.
Treat our name as a singular as we’re THE force for change, so for example, ‘Cycling UK is the cyclists’ champion’.
Use the apostrophe as a singular with our name so for example, ‘Cycling UK’s regional volunteers are awesome’.
Be careful with that other apostrophe – make sure when using our strapline (The cyclists’ champion) in text that you always make the cyclists plural because we’re there for everyone who loves cycling, so it must always be written cyclists’ (apostrophe after the ‘s’).

User avatar
freiston
Posts: 541
Joined: 6 Oct 2013, 10:20am

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby freiston » 6 Apr 2016, 8:56pm

Bicycler wrote:No wind up.
From the Brand Kit (pdf): http://www.cyclinguk.org/sites/default/ ... nd_kit.pdf

I opened that doc and saw the strapline "Learn it. Love it. Use it." Such a mantra/edict would be superfluous if the members' hearts and minds were all for the changes. Without that member-support, it is just a hollow and bitter-tasting piece of spin. At work I have to put up and go along with such crude and vulgar devices because I am a wage-slave but when an organisation that charges for membership uses those tactics, it is another thing that pushes me further towards the door.
Disclaimer: Treat what I say with caution and if possible, wait for someone with more knowledge and experience to contribute. ;)

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 10721
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby mjr » 6 Apr 2016, 9:52pm

Learn it, love it, use it? Reminiscent of catch it, kill it, bin it?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 42981
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby Mick F » 6 Apr 2016, 10:16pm

Love it.
:lol:
Mick F. Cornwall

Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby Bicycler » 6 Apr 2016, 10:50pm

Learn it
Mick F wrote:Love it.

Use it

daverix
Posts: 5
Joined: 9 Apr 2007, 12:54pm

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby daverix » 7 Apr 2016, 12:24pm

I think the urban dictionary definition of CUK is very apt considering the way the membership have been treated by the Council. "A ...(person)... who lies to her b/fs about everything."
We, the members, have been lied to and kept in the dark by Council, who have pushed these changes through without any reference to the membership or giving the opportunity for members to vote on a change of name at an AGM. They then have the gall to state in the magazine that we are "a democratic membership organisation" - (in the box about Cycling UKs board, near the bottom of page 11, and again at the bottom of page 12).

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 10721
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby mjr » 7 Apr 2016, 12:34pm

We are proud of our new name: Cycling UK. To grow our message and influence we need to make it as well-known as possible, it should never be abbreviated to CUK.

Would it be fair to say that many of us are not sure we want to help grow "their" influence and only wish to support "their" messages that we agree with, which means considering them on a message-by-message basis?

Also, it doesn't explain why abbreviation hinders growing their message or influence.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Euskadi
Posts: 164
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 8:16am
Location: London

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby Euskadi » 7 Apr 2016, 12:56pm

SA_SA_SA wrote:I didn't realise the abbreviation of the new brand was an insult: is that somehow karmic ? :)


Yes, I believe it must be. You guys CUK. Hey, we CUK! Maybe Gaz can tell us how much this invigorating, exciting re-brand cost, that has transformed a respected organisation into an insult, or point us to a link.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13103
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby gaz » 7 Apr 2016, 1:13pm

No, as an ordinary member I've no information on the costs other than a single entry in Council Minutes that I've linked previously, Item 10 July 2014.

Perhaps a former Councillor, one who was on Council from the announcement of the re-brand process in July 2013 up until just 23 days before the new brand was approved would be better placed to assist you.
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Bmblbzzz
Posts: 2008
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby Bmblbzzz » 7 Apr 2016, 1:24pm

Brand kit. Ok, so it doesn't really apply to everyday chat, it's for committee members (at all levels and using committee in its widest senses) to ensure consistent brand image and house style. Every organisation and every publication does, or should do, that. It's normal, expected and good.

However, the last sentence in the section Bicycler quoted above strikes me as odd, jarring even:
Be careful with that other apostrophe – make sure when using our strapline (The cyclists’ champion) in text that you always make the cyclists plural because we’re there for everyone who loves cycling, so it must always be written cyclists’ (apostrophe after the ‘s’).

While I agree cyclists must be plural because it refers to all, does it refer to "everyone who loves cycling"? I thought the main idea of the charity conversion and re-imaging was to appeal to, represent and further the interests of people who DON'T love cycling but simply want to get around by bike.

User avatar
gaz
Posts: 13103
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, car park of England

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby gaz » 7 Apr 2016, 1:28pm

Bmblbzzz wrote:While I agree cyclists must be plural because it refers to all, does it refer to "everyone who loves cycling"? I thought the main idea of the charity conversion and re-imaging was to appeal to, represent and further the interests of people who DON'T love cycling but simply want to get around by bike.

Yes, it refers to everyone who loves cycling (without excluding anyone who does not love cycling :wink: ).
Hand wash only. Do not iron.

Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby Bicycler » 7 Apr 2016, 1:40pm

I had thought along the same lines. Some have argued that we needed to change away from an organisation which appeared to represent "cyclists" to an organisation which promoted "cycling". It seems strange to do this in the name but reverse it in the tag line. Also, I never imagined that we'd change our name and introduce another problematic apostrophe. Maybe this counts as celebrating the club's heritage :wink:

Psamathe
Posts: 9246
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby Psamathe » 7 Apr 2016, 1:43pm

gaz wrote:...
Perhaps a former Councillor, one who was on Council from the announcement of the re-brand process in July 2013 up until just 23 days before the new brand was approved would be better placed to assist you.

Or better still somebody from National Office who knows what was spent. Or a current Councillor who will/should have access to the figures. I don't quite understand why you think an ex-Councillor would be well placed to find out such information.

Ian

geocycle
Posts: 1518
Joined: 11 Jan 2007, 9:46am

Re: Don't mention the CUK

Postby geocycle » 7 Apr 2016, 1:53pm

In the late 16th century a cuk or cuck was a slang term used as an insult, short for cuckold. I seem to recall Malvolio in Twelth Night but I can't look it up at the moment.