Done. Noted that the list of membership categories does not include life membership. We may be small in number, but surely the information is relevant.
Have just completed this-agree there is no indication that it is a substantial survey. Also agree that structure is poor (left feedback in one of the comments boxes) - some(but not all )questions limit to 3 awnsers when more apply. The "why you cycle does not offer an "other" - so i was forced to supply an incorrect response. Nothing about governance
Also - open to non-members- so what exactly are we going to learn?
yann wrote:Have just completed this-agree there is no indication that it is a substantial survey. Also agree that structure is poor (left feedback in one of the comments boxes) - some(but not all )questions limit to 3 awnsers when more apply. The "why you cycle does not offer an "other" - so i was forced to supply an incorrect response. Nothing about governance
Also - open to non-members- so what exactly are we going to learn?
As Daryl Huff wrote in "How to lie with statistics", it will be established that some people (number, proportion?) like to spend quite a bit of time answering surveys Not sure what else might be learnt
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120 Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
When I did the survey I didn't provide my contact details. I've already got a bike I love so don't want another (not even for free) and I'm not interested in being contacted further by CTC.
yann wrote: ... Also - open to non-members- so what exactly are we going to learn?
Contact details of non-members sufficiently interest in cycling to enter a survey with the prospect of winning a bike?
+1 It's very hard to be kind to CUK in these circumstances, much as I would like to be. The introduction was disingenuous to the point of being deceptive - misleading isn't strong enough. I'm fairly shocked by CUK, though not by the survey. As Marshall McLuhan said, the medium is the messsage. When you read their enticements and then see the questions you realise what he meant: this survey (as they all are) was designed to elicit information about respondents (it has nothing to do with feedback about CUK - if it has, it is about how CUK adjusts its marketing position).
How far the mightly have fallen was my response. I did answer all the questions (in order to get to the rest of them) but with an increasingly sickening feeling. The good thing is that by seeing these "surveys" for what they are, it is possible to dismiss them and avoid being dragged further into the mire of marketing dressed up as honest reflection.
I feel sad at how low CUK has stooped and sorry for those who are duped by this sort of thing.
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
yann wrote: ... Also - open to non-members- so what exactly are we going to learn?
Contact details of non-members sufficiently interest in cycling to enter a survey with the prospect of winning a bike?
+1 It's very hard to be kind to CUK in these circumstances, much as I would like to be. The introduction was disingenuous to the point of being deceptive - misleading isn't strong enough. I'm fairly shocked by CUK, though not by the survey. As Marshall McLuhan said, the medium is the messsage. When you read their enticements and then see the questions you realise what he meant: this survey (as they all are) was designed to elicit information about respondents (it has nothing to do with feedback about CUK - if it has, it is about how CUK adjusts its marketing position).
How far the mightly have fallen was my response. I did answer all the questions (in order to get to the rest of them) but with an increasingly sickening feeling. The good thing is that by seeing these "surveys" for what they are, it is possible to dismiss them and avoid being dragged further into the mire of marketing dressed up as honest reflection.
I feel sad at how low CUK has stooped and sorry for those who are duped by this sort of thing.
Hello "horizon"... just wondering what the "Bikes Belong on Trains " relates to? Is it just a statement or a pressure group?
thirdcrank wrote: Contact details of non-members sufficiently interest in cycling to enter a survey with the prospect of winning a bike?
+1 It's very hard to be kind to CUK in these circumstances, much as I would like to be. The introduction was disingenuous to the point of being deceptive - misleading isn't strong enough. I'm fairly shocked by CUK, though not by the survey. As Marshall McLuhan said, the medium is the messsage. When you read their enticements and then see the questions you realise what he meant: this survey (as they all are) was designed to elicit information about respondents (it has nothing to do with feedback about CUK - if it has, it is about how CUK adjusts its marketing position).
How far the mightly have fallen was my response. I did answer all the questions (in order to get to the rest of them) but with an increasingly sickening feeling. The good thing is that by seeing these "surveys" for what they are, it is possible to dismiss them and avoid being dragged further into the mire of marketing dressed up as honest reflection.
I feel sad at how low CUK has stooped and sorry for those who are duped by this sort of thing.
Hello "horizon"... just wondering what the "Bikes Belong on Trains " relates to? Is it just a statement or a pressure group?
I would like to know that too
Entertainer, juvenile, curmudgeon, PoB, 30120 Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott We love safety cameras, we hate bullies
Q4. what is the primary reason you ride your bike? Answer required, but there's no "other" option.
Q5. which types of bike does your household own? Again, no "other". Do I put nothing, on the basis that my most-used bike type isn't there, or do I put the three most-used that are there? At least this one isn't a required answer.
Q6. which types of cycling are you most interested in? Again, no "other". Heck, I think this is going to be a running theme and screw up most of the results.
Q8. which other fitness/exercise activities... I was wrong, this one has an "other" option. Bizarre!
Q11. what's the purpose of Cycling UK? And there's an "other" write-in. Bombs away!
Q12. how likely am I to actively support campaigns? Why's there no option for "already do"?
Q26. why would I join? If they think those might be the reasons, they still don't understand why people left, do they? At least there's an "other" write-in again.
Q28. can CUK put the prices up even further and remain more expensive than BC? All of the answers are about a price rise. No opportunity to tell them that even the current price is still above BC.
Q43... crikey, this is a loooooong survey. Bored now.
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.
mjr wrote:..... Q43... crikey, this is a loooooong survey. Bored now.
And do you have any confidence they will "take on board" the comments you (and others) have spent their time entering or is it just another case of Confirmation bias or input to another team of expensive Marketing/Image consultants.
mjr wrote:..... Q43... crikey, this is a loooooong survey. Bored now.
And do you have any confidence they will "take on board" the comments you (and others) have spent their time entering or is it just another case of Confirmation bias or input to another team of expensive Marketing/Image consultants.
No and it's going to suffer confirmation bias, but in some cases like the absence of being able to say you already do act on their campaigns, that's going to suggest that they're underachieving massively because there'll be many more people who are willing to campaign than currently do - so if I was one of the campaigns staff, I'd be a bit nervous right now!
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.