In order to kill the triangle-thingy we need to know where it is. Thankfully, it is off the cover of the Volunteer.
Where else have you seen it lately?
Here it is on the NCSAs page: http://ncsas.com/ (incidentally, why do NCSAs have their own .com website?
CAP PAO Toolkit: http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_pao_toolkit/ page as well as on the new CAP posters you can find on that page.
PAO Academy webpage: http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_public_affairs_officer_academy/
Hmmm...Sort of hunt it down and kill it where it lives?
Well, as I mentioned on my thread (http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=10501.msg192946#msg192946), after putting together the gallery of wing web sites (then region, by request), I found no use on ANY wing web sites in their headers. This is excellent news.
I also found it on the Annual Reports and financial statements.
There is no record of it that I can find in any National Board minutes, etc. concerning its adoption as an official CAP symbol. This is one reason that I am very opposed to it and asking members to add the Kill The Triangle Thingy banner to their CAPTalk signature (heck, use it elsewhere too, if you'd like).
The triangle and prop in general, of course, are deeply rooted in CAP's history. However, as Major C has noted, this is a totally new version with no blue field and doesn't really depict our traditional symbol well. It is also hard to read as has been noted. It dilutes our brand FURTHER than it is already being diluted. I see no reason for it.
Thank you for finding the NCSA domain. I must add it to my list that I've started of CAP domains. Just as with logos, apparently we do not have nearly enough domains either... >:(
Perhaps we won't have to wait for the next national commander to kill it, let's put it in the Siberian holding place where they keep the old statues of Stalin, it can occupy the space right next to where they'll put the CSU....
Quote from: O-Rex on May 16, 2010, 10:21:12 PM
Perhaps we won't have to wait for the next national commander to kill it, let's put it in the Siberian holding place where they keep the old statues of Stalin, it can occupy the space right next to where they'll put the CSU....
Hey...you're missing the banner from your sig line! :'(
Quote from: JC004 on May 16, 2010, 10:24:15 PM
Quote from: O-Rex on May 16, 2010, 10:21:12 PM
Perhaps we won't have to wait for the next national commander to kill it, let's put it in the Siberian holding place where they keep the old statues of Stalin, it can occupy the space right next to where they'll put the CSU....
Hey...you're missing the banner from your sig line! :'(
You will note it is on mine as well. Why? Because this symbol has no basis in traditions and does not have the "paper trail" in CAP governance and protocol that could/would/should warrant the creation of such a change from nowhere.
Quote from: Major Carrales on May 16, 2010, 10:28:17 PM
Quote from: JC004 on May 16, 2010, 10:24:15 PM
Quote from: O-Rex on May 16, 2010, 10:21:12 PM
Perhaps we won't have to wait for the next national commander to kill it, let's put it in the Siberian holding place where they keep the old statues of Stalin, it can occupy the space right next to where they'll put the CSU....
Hey...you're missing the banner from your sig line! :'(
You will note it is on mine as well. Why? Because this symbol has no basis in traditions and does not have the "paper trail" in CAP governance and protocol that could/would/should warrant the creation of such a change from nowhere.
Outstanding. Recommend backspacing the two banner codes together so they fit on the same line and don't take up so much vertical scroll space on the forum. :clap:
Tally ho! NOC "logo" here: http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/emergency_services/
I dare say this might be where it originated.
DN
The NOC logo is great. It violates the flag code. :'(
It's also now on the Platinum Plus Mastercard offered to members. The card used to have the seal on it. :(
It now uses this exact logo and wording:
(http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/Above_beyond_89AA085B894BE.jpg)
Do you have one?! Cut it up!!! WHY?! WHY?! WHY?!
>:(
PLEASE STOP THIS, NATIONAL.
Use the symbols duly approved by our governing bodies. The symbols that have represented us for nearly 7 decades.
Here, have something to put in your sig (right-click, Save As.. to host it yourself, please.
(http://www.cadetstuff.org/images/nin/brand_dilution.jpg)
Bonus points if you make the background transparent to fit with the alternating table colors ;)
Quote from: NIN on May 19, 2010, 04:46:57 PM
Here, have something to put in your sig (right-click, Save As.. to host it yourself, please.
(http://www.cadetstuff.org/images/nin/brand_dilution.jpg)
Note: The two can coexist. ;D
Good 'ol DQ would be proud...
(http://bwill.net/files/other/don_capixote.jpg)
Sometimes I like you, Bob. ;D
I had some downtime at work, figured I'd join in the fun. Didn't have access to Photoshop just Paint.NET so it's not as quality as I'd like.
I figure focus on what we want to use, and less on the crap we don't.
(http://www.imgftw.net/img/627587043.png)
Image address is http://www.imgftw.net/img/627587043.png if you want to include it somewhere.
Hm. Let's see, we started with the "kill the triangle thingey" logo, then NIN made something of the sort, and now Marshalus has created a sig to that effect. It seems to me that our anti-dilution sigs are becoming as diluted as the emblems/logos/etc themselves.
Like everything else in CAP, no one agrees on the best way to go about things ;)
I don't see any reg that states anyone must use anyone elses signature images.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 19, 2010, 08:32:06 PM
Hm. Let's see, we started with the "kill the triangle thingey" logo, then NIN made something of the sort, and now Marshalus has created a sig to that effect. It seems to me that our anti-dilution sigs are becoming as diluted as the emblems/logos/etc themselves.
Well...just as having posters or brochures with different themes and audiences, I suspect it is alright to have different banners as long as we have the same message. At least at the moment, the message is the same. It might be good if we had a universal wording throughout...a uniform slogan.
Quote from: JC004 on May 19, 2010, 09:51:50 PMjust as having posters or brochures with different themes and audiences, I suspect it is alright to have different banners as long as we have the same message.
You could use the same argument for the gazillion emblems and logos. Not that I support all of the emblems and logos, but you can apply that logic.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 20, 2010, 01:47:32 PM
Quote from: JC004 on May 19, 2010, 09:51:50 PMjust as having posters or brochures with different themes and audiences, I suspect it is alright to have different banners as long as we have the same message.
You could use the same argument for the gazillion emblems and logos. Not that I support all of the emblems and logos, but you can apply that logic.
Not really.
This is more akin to a grass roots protest in which we all show up to protest the same issue but carry pickets with our own message. The message is consistent - no more stupid triangle thingy!
:)
Sure you could. One could say "We need the MAJCOM patch when we do things geared towards military types, we need 18 corporate seals when we go to get sponsors (and we have our choice of colors to fit the situation), bla bla bla".
Just my .02.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on May 20, 2010, 02:35:55 PM
Sure you could. One could say "We need the MAJCOM patch when we do things geared towards military types, we need 18 corporate seals when we go to get sponsors (and we have our choice of colors to fit the situation), bla bla bla".
Just my .02.
But such logic is NOT applied. (I've been thinking about making a chart to show where what is applied for the various logo uses) Properly organizations use different posters, billboards, and the like. They tie things together with a unified message and identity, neither of which CAP seems to have. Watch McDonald's commercials from across the world - different to the culture and the like, same logo, same identity, same messages.
Here is an ad for KFC which created controversy in the United States because the culture ascribes a different meaning. Yet, you immediately identify the branding of KFC. They have a different target audience - same message, same branding. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FftZt-Dw_hQ
We don't have an identity for protesting a logo, just a message.
Spaceman, you it seem to be creating an issue where none exists.
I've spent 15 years in brand management, marketing and advertising and they truly are violating a few marketing 101 rules. This is simply a lack of brand management. As was said a couple of replies ago, well managed brands have a uniform identity when it comes to logos, colors, etc. across the world no matter the audience they are targeting.
For example:
McDonald's retired Mac At Night back in 1989 but have since revived the mascot in Asia to brand their new "24 Hour" concept. But it all tied back to the McDonald's corporate identity of the golden arches in print, on-line and television.
Most multi-national corporate identities spend millions in focus groups researching everything from colors in a logo to a positioning statement, looking for that perfect unified front. Now, I'm not saying we're in a position to need to do the same, but a max of 4 logos for our "corporate" identity as shown below with ONE logo being the most widely used logo for public consumption (my vote on that is the corporate seal that was on our vans until TP).
I do know that NHQ is working on a full blown marketing plan to be rolled out later this year, hopefully they are addressing this with said plan.
I'm really glad to see so many members concerned with the direction of CAP. It's refreshing to know people really do care as much as I do.
w00t! Join us!
Clearly there was no focus group here. Seems people hate the Triangle Thingy and are just about as bent out of shape about our identity crisis as I am. It sure hits home when it hits our wallets too. That's a serious problem that the National Board has continuously neglected.
Another find!
http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/Lets_Go_Fly_BOOK_LR_E6EFE88CEC48E.pdf
Quote from: RickRutledge on May 20, 2010, 04:57:12 PM
I do know that NHQ is working on a full blown marketing plan to be rolled out later this year, hopefully they are addressing this with said plan.
They've had one for a few years http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_public_awareness_plan/
Quote from: RiverAux on May 23, 2010, 05:55:55 PM
Quote from: RickRutledge on May 20, 2010, 04:57:12 PM
I do know that NHQ is working on a full blown marketing plan to be rolled out later this year, hopefully they are addressing this with said plan.
They've had one for a few years http://members.gocivilairpatrol.com/cap_national_hq/public_affairs/cap_public_awareness_plan/
You mean this to be a joke, right? On page 14, they're increasing brand recognition with vehicle wraps. That is, without a standardized logo... :'(
Didn't say it was a great plan, just that it existed. You would think that the use of the command patch throughout the plan would indicate that it was the preferred logo, but I guess not. The closest they get is talking about playing up the citizens serving communities motto.
So you'd think. The supporting documents...the marketing guide...has 3 different logos, including an improperly proportioned command patch in the AF symbol. :-\
Will it ever end?
I spotted the triangle on Certificates of Appreciation, don't know where the certificates came from, (member printed, or ordered blank print to just fill in the name/item/dates..
FYI, triangle-thingy is being put on all the NHQ staff's business cards.
Hmmm.. makes me wonder if the magazine cover was a "mistake" this time?
I just.. can't stand looking at that thing, ESPECIALLY when it's used in the magazine masthead like that.
There are a couple possible answers:
1. They are continuing in inconsistent usage of things (very likely)
2. Someone figured out how to spell "V-O-L-U-N-T-E-E-R" and it was not "V-A-L-U-N-T-E-E-R" (somewhat likely)
Interestingly, on the logo page in eservices, the triangle thing is referred to as a "seal". Doesn't look like any seal I've ever seen.
It's a SEAL because they SAID.
Turn the Triangle Thingy upside-down. Then, compare it to this image. You will see.
(http://thenationalevil.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/monk-seal.jpg)
Quick! Someone club the tri-angle thingy!!
Just spotted on the National Board flyer/invitation for the meeting in San Diego in Sep. "Click on the triange to register" Aaaarrrgh!
Quote from: Redbird Leader on May 24, 2010, 07:20:25 PM
Just spotted on the National Board flyer/invitation for the meeting in San Diego in Sep. "Click on the triange to register" Aaaarrrgh!
"I'll click when it is replaced by a duly approved logo."
I'm no fan of the Triangle Thingy or its apparently slipshod method of adoption, but I have to ask: With all of these sightings of its use, has anyone actually called NHQ and asked about it?
I mean, if there has been some 'official' adoption of the logo for some purposes, whether properly approved or not, we should at least find out what the NHQ folks 'think' the role of this new logo is supposed to be. Knowing your enemy's numbers and disposition, etc., etc.
I hereby nominate JC004 for this additional duty... ;D
Thom
Quote from: Thom on May 24, 2010, 07:34:31 PM
I'm no fan of the Triangle Thingy or its apparently slipshod method of adoption, but I have to ask: With all of these sightings of its use, has anyone actually called NHQ and asked about it?
I mean, if there has been some 'official' adoption of the logo for some purposes, whether properly approved or not, we should at least find out what the NHQ folks 'think' the role of this new logo is supposed to be. Knowing your enemy's numbers and disposition, etc., etc.
I hereby nominate JC004 for this additional duty... ;D
Thom
We'll try to send a mole, but they know. They're watching us.
After seeing this happen for a decade, I've been pretty used to them creating new logos and using them inconsistently all over. This is the way it has been done for a while. It's no one person's fault at NHQ or anything, but it is the fault of the NB for not addressing our brand and official symbols.
Regardless, as you can see in my links on the AF symbol usage and such, they haven't paid any mind to what we DO have in place or what the Air Force requires.
Don't bother calling NHQ. At least not the Public Affairs and Marketing folks who shove this garbage down our throats.
They are quite caught up in themselves, and really do NOT care what you losers in the field think of their brilliant ideas.
If you clods cannot understand the beauty of the new triangle, then that alone is proof of your genetic inferiority.
Quote from: JohnKachenmeister on May 24, 2010, 10:52:48 PM
Don't bother calling NHQ. At least not the Public Affairs and Marketing folks who shove this garbage down our throats.
They are quite caught up in themselves, and really do NOT care what you losers in the field think of their brilliant ideas.
If you clods cannot understand the beauty of the new triangle, then that alone is proof of your genetic inferiority.
Good heavens. They got to him. He's one of...THEM!
NHQ says: You will be assimilated, resistance is futile. >:D
(http://colganmarketing.com/kill.png)
We can take 'em!
Triangle thingy spotting. Wha?
Is that what the little green men are flying these days?
Also on the CAP photos page on flicker (linked from the VolunteerNow page): http://www.flickr.com/photos/civilairpatrol/sets/
These triangle thingys are rather everywhere.
That's a lot considering I can't find any guidelines for its use ANYWHERE nor any evidence that it was approved by any of our (too numerous) governing bodies.
How long has Vanguard been selling this http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=14849&cPath=6_390_405_406
Quote from: Marshalus on May 26, 2010, 02:54:50 PM
How long has Vanguard been selling this http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=14849&cPath=6_390_405_406 (http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=14849&cPath=6_390_405_406)
Dear lord it's gained physical form. Kill it. Kill it now and burn the remains.
Quote from: Marshalus on May 26, 2010, 02:54:50 PM
How long has Vanguard been selling this http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=14849&cPath=6_390_405_406
I sent them an inquiry as to why they're selling emblems that aren't approved, waiting for a reply.
Considering the highest stock # after that is
CAP0921: NHQ Flag, $571.40
CAP0920: Front License plate CAP logo thingy with red, white, blue slash stripes behind the traditional blue round seal, set in goldish color.
CAP0919: The Triangle-Thingy lapel pin.
Hopefully, they don't have too many of them (left), that if NHQ drops it, "we" don't have to spend a ton of loot buying them back.
A timeline can't really be gained from that, but in the grand scheme of things, it is "recently" added.
Wait... I just figured it out:
3 exterior sides of the triangle
3 interior sides of the triangle
equals: 6.
To a factor of 3 represented by the three blades of the propeller...
equals: 666!
The Triangle-Thingy IS THE MARK OF THE BEAST!!!!!
chmod -R 777 Triangle-Thingy
Quote from: a2capt on May 26, 2010, 04:21:03 PM
chmod -R 777 Triangle-Thingy
What are you messing with permissions for? I think you mean:
rm -rf /triangle-thingy
Quote from: Marshalus on May 26, 2010, 04:40:56 PM
Quote from: a2capt on May 26, 2010, 04:21:03 PM
chmod -R 777 Triangle-Thingy
What are you messing with permissions for? I think you mean:
rm -rf /triangle-thingy
Just nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Quote from: Marshalus on May 26, 2010, 02:54:50 PM
How long has Vanguard been selling this http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=14849&cPath=6_390_405_406
It's spreading faster than swine flu. It's TriFlu. Run!
Quote from: wuzafuzz on May 26, 2010, 04:44:21 PM
Quote from: Marshalus on May 26, 2010, 02:54:50 PM
How long has Vanguard been selling this http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=14849&cPath=6_390_405_406
It's spreading faster than swine flu. It's TriFlu. Run!
EWWWWW, WHAT THE CRAP?!
Come on, people. This is unnecessary dilution of our brand. But who needs a brand, right? We have wraps.
I thought this was just going to be a thing for the National Board/Conference promos, like the CAP Monopoly Houses logo, but like the Monopoly Houses logo, it spread. I found the Monopoly Houses on the vehicle wrap that I posted here.
Anybody else see the Monopoly Houses logo on vehicles? Is it part of the Van Brand?
What makes this lapel logo more amusing, is that it's not even consistent with the gray/purple one they have already been using. It's a gold triangle.
LMAO. You're right. This is so hilarious. So positively ridiculous. They make a new one and not even that is kept consistent? As I've mentioned throughout the board, NHQ doesn't keep this stuff consistent and even flat-out forgets that 900-2 exists in what they do with the seal, emblem, and the Air Force symbol. For instance, the various incorrect versions of the seal that they use. On top of that, the CAP seal/AF symbol combo that they use (and can be seen on the "CAP University" page).
There was this whole thing with Arkansas Wing's letterhead, but who can blame Arkansas if NHQ isn't even using it IAW CAPR 900-2 and AF guidelines? I'm not saying it's right, but higher headquarters sets the pace, right?
Quote from: Marshalus on May 26, 2010, 04:40:56 PMWhat are you messing with permissions for? I think you mean:rm -rf /triangle-thingy
Because with the permissions changed, we can do whatever we want with it ;-)
Like you just did.
Quote from: a2capt on May 26, 2010, 05:30:12 PM
Quote from: Marshalus on May 26, 2010, 04:40:56 PMWhat are you messing with permissions for? I think you mean:rm -rf /triangle-thingy
Because with the permissions changed, we can do whatever we want with it ;-)
Like you just did.
Gotcha
Branding for Dummies, page 23
Quote
Branding's essential ingredient
Originally we titled this section "Branding's Essential Ingredients." Lucky for
you, we changed the plural to a singular. Brands are built around four fundamentals:
product differentiation, relevance, esteem, and knowledge. But the
magic ingredient that converts those fundamentals into a branding success
story is consistency. If you bring consistency to your branding program, you
end up with a brand that stands head and shoulders (no branding pun
intended) above the others.
Emphasis mine.
Just thought I'd post the reply from the email I sent to Vanguard on the issue of the lapel pin.
Quote from: Vanguard guyMr. Taylor:
It seems that I did over the link you so thoughtfully included in your message. The lapel pin in question was designed by CAP NHQ last year as a novelty item. It is not a uniform item and as such, did not require authorization from any governing body or entity of the Civil Air Patrol. I hope this answers your question. I am forwarding a copy of this email thread to our liaison at CAP NHQ so that they can be aware of your concerns.
Please contact me if I can be of further assistance.
Apparently it came from National and was not originated at Vanguard. Just just further proof that the guys up at National have no idea how to create and maintain an effective brand.
But they couldn't at least make it the same colors?!
Come ooooooooon. I don't want my brand to be a novelty item. I want it to be a BRAND.
Too long, IMHO!
The horror of it all.
Quote from: davidsinn on May 26, 2010, 04:42:34 PM
Just nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
LOL! I love that movie!
DN
Just posting the image here for the benefit of those who wish to see and it'll save 'em a click.
Now that I look at it more, I realized that it isn't the same shape either. The prop is a different size. Sooooo, let's try this again:
Branding for Dummies, page 23
Quote
Branding's essential ingredient
Originally we titled this section "Branding's Essential Ingredients." Lucky for
you, we changed the plural to a singular. Brands are built around four fundamentals:
product differentiation, relevance, esteem, and knowledge. But the
magic ingredient that converts those fundamentals into a branding success
story is consistency. If you bring consistency to your branding program, you
end up with a brand that stands head and shoulders (no branding pun
intended) above the others.
Emphasis mine.
(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/medium/0000000cap0919_MED.jpg)
Interestingly, NHQ public affairs uses the command patch on their press releases. As the prime promoter of the triangle thingy I would have expected to see it on this product.
Quote from: RiverAux on May 27, 2010, 09:24:05 PM
Interestingly, NHQ public affairs uses the command patch on their press releases. As the prime promoter of the triangle thingy I would have expected to see it on this product.
Why? Did you see consistency somewhere?
It's not really their fault...the policy makers have failed to address our brand issue on the whole for many, many years (so it isn't truly the fault of the current people in power either).
There has been changes like the "U.S. Civil Air Patrol," the command patches (all three), the emblem from the race car that was going on National's publications for a while, the van/aircraft changes, CIVIL AIR PATROL TRANSFORMERS, etc.
Regardless of fault, it has to be addressed like yesterday and a style guide needs to be released. That then needs to be enforced from NHQ on down (since, as we see, NHQ isn't following current guidance).
Quote from: JC004 on May 27, 2010, 04:06:50 AM(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/medium/0000000cap0919_MED.jpg)
OMG I feel like I'm about to bring up a technicolor yawn. Yuck.
It's nice to know folks at the top care more about this triangle thingy, than more important things. (i.e. the stuff affecting grassroots-level members).
::)
My squadron just got a box of DDR stuff, which included quite a few copies of a publication called "Let's Go Flying". It had the logo. :-[
Sounds like we really need a better TTR campaign to counter it.
Can we kill the DDR logo too?
Quote from: Daniel L on May 28, 2010, 07:31:10 AM
Can we kill the DDR logo too?
Better yet, how about we just kill DDR?!
(ducks, runs...and hopes the thread just stays on topic)
Guess what other symbol is in use to help us with our brand? This is the CAP Foundation http://www.civilairpatrolfoundation.com/
Sigh... :(
Quote from: RiverAux on May 31, 2010, 03:15:21 AM
Guess what other symbol is in use to help us with our brand? This is the CAP Foundation http://www.civilairpatrolfoundation.com/ (http://www.civilairpatrolfoundation.com/)
OK, so there we have the traditional red prop within a white triangle, but without a blue field.
I won't mention the clear issues with the web site, but this is yet another variation of CAP logos being used.
My question is simple: Will it ever end?
Let's hope it ends soon. It might rub off on McDonald's and they might go creating logos with different letters and crap!
You know...the other day, I saw a commercial on TV. Even
without the company's logo being visible until the end, I knew within maybe 2 seconds what company it was
purely because of the color, even before the narration started!
Now THAT'S branding. Van wraps are not.
POP QUIZ: I am a company logo. I am red with white cursive letters. What company am I?
Ummm...Sara Lee?
They're not cursive, just weird.
Quote from: Daniel L on May 28, 2010, 07:31:10 AM
Can we kill the DDR logo too?
OH! I have an idea for the replacement!
Imagine it: A shield, with a bunch of drug users running in horror from a CAP GA-8 shooting lightning at each of them, and in the scroll, it read, "DDR - USAF AUXILIARY" It would be epic. And would scare a lot of dumb high schoolers from doing drugs, lest the airplane attack them.
Quote
You know...the other day, I saw a commercial on TV. Even without the company's logo being visible until the end, I knew within maybe 2 seconds what company it was purely because of the color, even before the narration started! Now THAT'S branding. Van wraps are not.
POP QUIZ: I am a company logo. I am red with white cursive letters. What company am I?
the good ol Coca Cola... But NHQ thinks "Just do it!" without thinking... :(
Quote from: Krapenhoeffer on May 31, 2010, 05:38:10 AM
Quote from: Daniel L on May 28, 2010, 07:31:10 AM
Can we kill the DDR logo too?
OH! I have an idea for the replacement!
Imagine it: A shield, with a bunch of drug users running in horror from a CAP GA-8 shooting lightning at each of them, and in the scroll, it read, "DDR - USAF AUXILIARY" It would be epic. And would scare a lot of dumb high schoolers from doing drugs, lest the airplane attack them.
Sure - why not. Either the current logo or your new one would be better than the weird "working for a drug free universe" thing. I mean, let's focus on Earth first...
Quote from: vento on May 31, 2010, 05:53:49 AM
Quote
You know...the other day, I saw a commercial on TV. Even without the company's logo being visible until the end, I knew within maybe 2 seconds what company it was purely because of the color, even before the narration started! Now THAT'S branding. Van wraps are not.
POP QUIZ: I am a company logo. I am red with white cursive letters. What company am I?
the good ol Coca Cola... But NHQ thinks "Just do it!" without thinking... :(
DING DING DING
Quote from: Krapenhoeffer on May 31, 2010, 05:38:10 AM
Quote from: Daniel L on May 28, 2010, 07:31:10 AM
Can we kill the DDR logo too?
OH! I have an idea for the replacement!
Imagine it: A shield, with a bunch of drug users running in horror from a CAP GA-8 shooting lightning at each of them, and in the scroll, it read, "DDR - USAF AUXILIARY" It would be epic. And would scare a lot of dumb high schoolers from doing drugs, lest the airplane attack them.
I'd buy that!
(http://www.capvolunteernow.com/file.cfm/media/news/CAPVan3edited_F5A13B2027B12.jpg)
http://www.capvolunteernow.com/todays_features.cfm/cap_wrapped_up_in_partnership_with_vanguard?show=news&newsID=6485
Certificates of Appreciation.
You know what makes me puke about that van?
The position of the 182 in flight. Makes it look like a kiddie toy, or flying around goofing off because of the way that graphic somewhat implies there is a smoke/flight trail behind it.
Quote from: John McClainVanguard can put the CAP logo on almost any clothing item in the catalog.
So, is the
tri-angle thingy "the CAP logo" now? WTF?!
Ack. The CAC has it too.
http://cac.cap.gov/
In addition to that, they're making their own seals:
(http://cac.cap.gov/images/Seal%20of%20the%20Chairman%20-%20Black%20Background.jpg)
I think we're teaching them wrong about branding. :'(
Perhaps I've become a conspiracy theorist, but the triangle-thingy is only one facet of what I see as a move from the top to 'de-militarize' CAP.
But the perfectly good (official) triangles that we already have existed before we were the Air Force Auxiliary (well, before the Air Force existed too). Regardless, de-militarizing our brand isn't going to help any.
We've got to select a whole image before we go off rebranding things. That's how it's done.
Quote from: JC004 on June 07, 2010, 04:30:26 AM
Ack. The CAC has it too.
http://cac.cap.gov/ (http://cac.cap.gov/)
In addition to that, they're making their own seals:
(http://cac.cap.gov/images/Seal%20of%20the%20Chairman%20-%20Black%20Background.jpg)
I think we're teaching them wrong about branding. :'(
I thought that was created by a cadet with a major ego problem and isn't official in anyway shape or form?
For not being official, I've seen it on many things. Thats the problem with stuff like that, absent of an official guide of what should be being used.
Quote from: davidsinn on June 07, 2010, 10:19:08 AM
I thought that was created by a cadet with a major ego problem and isn't official in anyway shape or form?
Future TP
Just for giggles and snits I submitted the following to the KnowledgeBase:
What are the official branding elements used by Civil Air Patrol? It seems like we get a new logo every couple of months. CAPR 900-2 only lists the CAP Seal, CAP Emblem, and CAP version of the new AF logo, and not the majcom patch, the triangle thing that appeared on on the cover of the Volunteer, or any of the other various logos that have appeared and disappeared.
I'll post whatever response I get.
Quote from: davidsinn on June 07, 2010, 10:19:08 AM
I thought that was created by a cadet with a major ego problem and isn't official in anyway shape or form?
*shrug* I just keep seeing more symbols. It makes my head spin. Now they've got the triangle thingy, but I guess at least it's not on these seals that they made.
Opps. Missed one. Same page. Another triangle thingy (tiny one):
(http://cac.cap.gov/images/Courter%20and%20King.jpg)
Where? The triangle in the center of the CAP Seal is proper. The "Triangle Thingy" is the one some buffoon introduced last year and dumped on the cover of the Volunteer.
Look on the good General's left lapel!
SarDragon has it. Of course I know what the Triangle Thingy is. I popularized its name. :-)
Oops. You're right - it is small.
It's the Vanguard one that doesn't match the unofficial official one.
You know, this new triangle crap is so funny it's not funny.
Great, monumental leaps and bounds are being made by CAP(!)
... but a few folks upstairs are still getting hung up on stupid junk like this. :-\
Think about it: there is an incredible, never-before-seen force of momentum propeling Civil Air Patrol forward (and like never before)...
But a few colonels are still more intently focused on a little piece of metal, adorned with small bits of colored enamel and a tiny pin on the other side.
(But that's okay... this huge tree is upside down, and the dead wood is falling off like never before.) Finally!
So much for affixing things in the uniform manual .. unless.. it's in there now. ;-)
Quote from: arajca on June 07, 2010, 04:00:25 PM
Just for giggles and snits I submitted the following to the KnowledgeBase:
What are the official branding elements used by Civil Air Patrol? It seems like we get a new logo every couple of months. CAPR 900-2 only lists the CAP Seal, CAP Emblem, and CAP version of the new AF logo, and not the majcom patch, the triangle thing that appeared on on the cover of the Volunteer, or any of the other various logos that have appeared and disappeared.
I'll post whatever response I get.
From the KB Manager:
QuoteSee authorized CAP Seals/Emblems under CAP e-services.
Please see knowledgebase answer(s) below for additional details.
Answer Title: Use of the CAP name and seal on official correspondence
Answer Link: http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=514 (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=514)
My reply:
That does NOT answer my question. According to reg, only the seal and emblem are authorized. Why does NHQ insist upon using unauthorized logos which confuse the members, the public, and our customers? Is there a cohesive branding plan in place for CAP or is subject to whims of anyone at NHQ with access to graphics software?OK, so it's a little direct. Sometimes you need a hammer.
Quote from: arajca on June 07, 2010, 07:38:53 PM
Quote from: arajca on June 07, 2010, 04:00:25 PM
Just for giggles and snits I submitted the following to the KnowledgeBase:
What are the official branding elements used by Civil Air Patrol? It seems like we get a new logo every couple of months. CAPR 900-2 only lists the CAP Seal, CAP Emblem, and CAP version of the new AF logo, and not the majcom patch, the triangle thing that appeared on on the cover of the Volunteer, or any of the other various logos that have appeared and disappeared.
I'll post whatever response I get.
From the KB Manager:
QuoteSee authorized CAP Seals/Emblems under CAP e-services.
Please see knowledgebase answer(s) below for additional details.
Answer Title: Use of the CAP name and seal on official correspondence
Answer Link: http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=514 (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=514)
My reply:
That does NOT answer my question. According to reg, only the seal and emblem are authorized. Why does NHQ insist upon using unauthorized logos which confuse the members, the public, and our customers? Is there a cohesive branding plan in place for CAP or is subject to whims of anyone at NHQ with access to graphics software?
OK, so it's a little direct. Sometimes you need a hammer.
I think we need a bigger hammer.
I wrote a petition a couple weeks ago, but never said anything, what are thoughts on passing it around and then sending it up?
http://www.petitiononline.com/nocaptri/petition.html
QuoteAs members of the Civil Air Patrol, the United States Air Force Auxiliary, we request that the national headquarters immediately discontinue the use of the "triangle logo" that has recently gained prominence. The "triangle logo" is defined as the image of the red CAP prop, with a light gray/purple triangle behind it with the words CIVIL, AIR, and PATROL on each side of the triangle.
We feel that this branding does not properly reflect our organization as professional and military oriented, nor does it have any deep history in our organization. The image is also typically shown distorted and hard to read, which also contributes to its unprofessional appearance.
There are far superior images available for use by CAP, including the command patch, official seal, and traditional civil defense inspired round logo. All three of these images connect us to our past and reflect our unique relationship with the United States Air Force. We further encourage the national organization to limit itself to utilizing these three basic images when advertising the Civil Air Patrol as a national program.
Immediately discontinuing the use of this logo would be of minimal cost to the organization and would be of benefit to the entire program.
Quote from: arajca on June 07, 2010, 07:38:53 PM
Quote from: arajca on June 07, 2010, 04:00:25 PM
Just for giggles and snits I submitted the following to the KnowledgeBase:
What are the official branding elements used by Civil Air Patrol? It seems like we get a new logo every couple of months. CAPR 900-2 only lists the CAP Seal, CAP Emblem, and CAP version of the new AF logo, and not the majcom patch, the triangle thing that appeared on on the cover of the Volunteer, or any of the other various logos that have appeared and disappeared.
I'll post whatever response I get.
From the KB Manager:
QuoteSee authorized CAP Seals/Emblems under CAP e-services.
Please see knowledgebase answer(s) below for additional details.
Answer Title: Use of the CAP name and seal on official correspondence
Answer Link: http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=514 (http://capnhq.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/capnhq.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=514)
My reply:
That does NOT answer my question. According to reg, only the seal and emblem are authorized. Why does NHQ insist upon using unauthorized logos which confuse the members, the public, and our customers? Is there a cohesive branding plan in place for CAP or is subject to whims of anyone at NHQ with access to graphics software?
OK, so it's a little direct. Sometimes you need a hammer.
Latest Response:
QuoteResponse (KB Manager) - 06/07/2010 01:21 PM
Please contact CAP Public Affairs to discuss this issue.
Toll free 877-227-9142 Ext 250 or Commercial 334 953-7748 Ext 250
I'll email them next.
Quote from: arajca on June 07, 2010, 08:32:14 PM
Latest Response:
QuoteResponse (KB Manager) - 06/07/2010 01:21 PM
Please contact CAP Public Affairs to discuss this issue.
Toll free 877-227-9142 Ext 250 or Commercial 334 953-7748 Ext 250
I'll email them next.
As should we all. Or simply send them a link to this thread.
Well done!
Oh, I think we can guarantee that NHQ public affairs keeps a close eye on CAPTalk given how quickly they've changed some things in the past once errors were pointed out here.
River is right. I feel like the quick backtracking on the CAP Transformers slogan probably had a lot to do with its reception on CAPTalk and possibly the potential legal concerns of that particular slogan.
However, unlike CAP Transformers, some people liked and defended that here. That does not appear to be happening with the Triangle Thingy. People have been talking about this logo (not nicely and quite a lot) well before I rehashed the style guide topic. Style guides also have been talked about quite a lot here and off the forum. The issue is well-known on the ground and I've heard about it all over.
I've even known cadets to play games at activities, guessing/betting on what van graphics/decals will show up at the activity. One member was even doing a photo collage at one activity.
The thingy made its way to challenge coins! >:(
http://www.vanguardmil.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=6_422_2222
Those look dangerous. They should probably not be given to cadets. >:(
I love how not even this logo is consistent with other uses of it. Seriously?!
They look more disgusting than dangerous. I can't begin to convey how awful that looks on that piece.
Quote from: davidsinn on June 07, 2010, 10:19:08 AM
Quote from: JC004 on June 07, 2010, 04:30:26 AM
Ack. The CAC has it too.
http://cac.cap.gov/ (http://cac.cap.gov/)
In addition to that, they're making their own seals:
(http://cac.cap.gov/images/Seal%20of%20the%20Chairman%20-%20Black%20Background.jpg)
I think we're teaching them wrong about branding. :'(
I thought that was created by a cadet with a major ego problem and isn't official in anyway shape or form?
If there was any question, look carefully at the bottom wing thingy - two diamonds because Chairman King is not a Col, only a LT Col. Therefore only two diamonds as the "body" of the winged creature.
I recently saw it embroidered on golf shirts worn by auditors from NHQ Finance.
Quote from: Eclipse on July 23, 2010, 11:37:28 PM
I recently saw it on embroidered on golf shirts worn by auditors from NHQ Finance.
Maybe giving everyone a valid reason for distaste towards auditors? >:D
If they can not decide on one simple design, how the heck are we supposed to believe they know what is best for CAP. Fire them all!!
Quote from: High Speed Low Drag on July 23, 2010, 11:32:24 PM
Quote from: davidsinn on June 07, 2010, 10:19:08 AM
Quote from: JC004 on June 07, 2010, 04:30:26 AM
Ack. The CAC has it too.
http://cac.cap.gov/ (http://cac.cap.gov/)
In addition to that, they're making their own seals:
(http://cac.cap.gov/images/Seal%20of%20the%20Chairman%20-%20Black%20Background.jpg)
I think we're teaching them wrong about branding. :'(
I thought that was created by a cadet with a major ego problem and isn't official in anyway shape or form?
If there was any question, look carefully at the bottom wing thingy - two diamonds because Chairman King is not a Col, only a LT Col. Therefore only two diamonds as the "body" of the winged creature.
I met this young Gentleman. He is very intent on doing the best he can for CAP. However, we need to stop letting members invent symbols and designs and logos for things that do NOT EXIST!!!!
Quote from: Eclipse on July 23, 2010, 11:37:28 PM
I recently saw it embroidered on golf shirts worn by auditors from NHQ Finance.
Agh. I'm sure we paid for these...
Quote from: Patterson on July 24, 2010, 12:13:40 AM
I met this young Gentleman. He is very intent on doing the best he can for CAP. However, we need to stop letting members invent symbols and designs and logos for things that do NOT EXIST!!!!
I didn't mean anything against him by posting the "seal" - I've never met him. Just to your point. Even the National Commander doesn't have her own SEAL. I also don't mean anything against the many who have TRIED over time to contribute to our directionless marketing initiative. Nonetheless, stuff like the Triangle Thingy have GOT TO GO and we need a comprehensive, professional branding/marketing/advertising plan just like other organizations of CAP's size. Enough of the politics and crap. Pick a freaking set of Pantone colors already!
I'm ashamed.....I live in washington, and I just noticed the washington wing patch has it too! check it out wawg.cap.gov (http://wawg.cap.gov)
The emblem in the Washington Wing patch IS the correct emblem. It's the 3 bladed prop in a trianle without the blue background that is the "thingy".
Did anyone end up calling public affairs? What did they have to say on the matter?
ALERT!......ALERT!
NEW THINGY SIGHTING!
I got an email today from NHQ (Gen. Coulter) about the National Conference. Right on top is a "thingy". Oh, the shame...... :-[
*sigh*
Quote from: JC004 on July 24, 2010, 06:26:13 AM
I didn't mean anything against him by posting the "seal" - I've never met him. Just to your point. Even the National Commander doesn't have her own SEAL.
This is just the natural progression from "State of the Council" Addresses.
For all the "good things" this CAC has been "trying" to do, all I see are two polls which have been talked about for what, a year? I've seen more stuff coming out of the CAC promoting the Chairman than actually getting stuff done.
Since the last time, the logo changed!
Old:
(http://cac.cap.gov/images/Seal%20of%20the%20Chairman%20-%20Black%20Background.jpg)
New:
(http://cac.cap.gov/images/seal.jpg)
But honestly...two diamonds? If we had a C/Major, would it have to change to one? What if it was a Capt? Jeeze...
One is the personal seal of the chairman because apparently the chair of NCAC needs a personal seal like the President. It's silly, but the Triangle Thingy is even more silly.
Quote from: JC004 on August 06, 2010, 06:40:58 PM
One is the personal seal of the chairman because apparently the chair of NCAC needs a personal seal like the President. It's silly, but the Triangle Thingy is even more silly.
I would agree, based on scope and support from above, however both are quite silly. :)
It is also to be found on the recruiting posters and brochures to be had from NHQ. >:(
FAIL. It seems silly to put something unofficial on brochures for recruiting, especially when they won't match the other logos the people see online and otherwise.
The "Triangle Thingy" is all over the new Annual Report that all Squadron Commanders received this month, as well as the new DDR Aerospace program books and new AEO pamphlets.
The Corporation should either adopt it as an official "whatever", or stick to a branding plan. PERIOD. How hard is this?
Agree, but waste money putting it all over our vans, aircraft, signage, web sites, and everything else when there isn't even guidance? Stupid crap. The wings would all have to adopt it too (at their expense), since as I determined that not a single wing is using it on their web site.
Lets not forget, still.. the Triangle Thingy is just plain ugly.
Face it, guys - the windmills won.
(http://www.mainlesson.com/books/baldwin/quixote/zpage132.gif)
Not so well. You can't just randomly place whatever the heck logos all over the place. Note Branding for Dummies above. It will likely just be replaced by something else at random just like all the others we've been seeing for years. One becomes a favorite, appears everywhere, then disappears.
Write the National PAO and ask him to knock it off. :)
Why? The logo is clearly UNIVERSALLY loved. Look how many people have signatures that say "Save the Triangle Thingy" - not to mention how many people are defending it here!
Too lazy to read the thread, The Thingy is on CAP's facebook.
As a little ray of hope:
The latest edition of the "Volunteer" uses the official (and correct) CAP seal - both on the cover and on the inner Table of Contents.
:clap:
Quote from: A.Member on August 16, 2010, 11:28:07 PM
As a little ray of hope:
The latest edition of the "Volunteer" uses the official (and correct) CAP seal - both on the cover and on the inner Table of Contents.
:clap:
But, unfortunately, the Triangle Thingy (T2) does make an appearance on the bottom of page 36 on the advertisement for the Annual Conference & National Board. :-[
(Apropos of nothing, this is my 100th post.)
Say..
Is there a session at the NB that we could submit this issue to?
Quote from: A.Member on August 16, 2010, 11:28:07 PM
As a little ray of hope:
The latest edition of the "Volunteer" uses the official (and correct) CAP seal - both on the cover and on the inner Table of Contents.
:clap:
That might be good. Inconsistency is the core of this whole issue though.
Quote from: a2capt on August 17, 2010, 02:22:47 AM
Say..
Is there a session at the NB that we could submit this issue to?
No, but there is a suggestion box marked "Marketing Comments & Suggestions." It is the box that makes a grinding sound when you put a paper in it.
Quote from: JC004 on August 17, 2010, 10:33:39 PMNo, but there is a suggestion box marked "Marketing Comments & Suggestions." It is the box that makes a grinding sound when you put a paper in it.
I wonder how funny it would be if a random picket sign appeared in the halls.. "Kill the Triangle-Thingy".. and some little calling cards get left on a table or two..
You know, those things you can get get free from Vista Print .. ;-)
Bring 'em on!
Quote from: JC004 on August 12, 2010, 12:13:27 AM
Not so well. You can't just randomly place whatever the heck logos all over the place.
Clearly you can.
Quote from: JC004 on August 12, 2010, 01:11:02 AM
Why? The logo is clearly UNIVERSALLY loved. Look how many people have signatures that say "Save the Triangle Thingy" - not to mention how many people are defending it here!
What it
is, is universally not noticed or cared enough about to take more than a passing interest. Like most of the things the <100 really active people on this board "discuss", most of it is minutia that some members never even consider, let alone care about.
I agree it will likely disappear with the same fanfare it came in with - one only needs to look at those chest patches from the '70's that look like they were designed by a 12 year old who watched to mu Space:1999 to see the cycle of these things.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 18, 2010, 12:10:06 AM
Quote from: JC004 on August 12, 2010, 12:13:27 AM
Not so well. You can't just randomly place whatever the heck logos all over the place.
Clearly you can.
Stop that. I am trying to convince them that the world will explode if they do it. Then perhaps they will stop.
Quote from: Eclipse on August 18, 2010, 12:10:06 AM
Quote from: JC004 on August 12, 2010, 01:11:02 AM
Why? The logo is clearly UNIVERSALLY loved. Look how many people have signatures that say "Save the Triangle Thingy" - not to mention how many people are defending it here!
What it is, is universally not noticed or cared enough about to take more than a passing interest. Like most of the things the <100 really active people on this board "discuss", most of it is minutia that some members never even consider, let alone care about.
I agree it will likely disappear with the same fanfare it came in with - one only needs to look at those chest patches from the '70's that look like they were designed by a 12 year old who watched to mu Space:1999 to see the cycle of these things.
That is true of many things here. Interestingly, it doesn't get a fight here. Barely anyone will stick up for the logo. On the other hand, they will fight to the DEATH on uniforms and lots of other things.
I talk marketing a lot - even watching a movie (ask Kieloch). I'm yet to find any members that I've talked to off CAPTalk who were like "I really like that logo!" It seems to be disliked fairly universally, even for people who take little or no interest in our marketing.
What I'd
REALLY like to know is why this thing is being placed everywhere, remains unofficial, and yet there is no agenda item for approving it as an official CAP logo at the National Board meeting. Perhaps they are too focused on things that are of less importance than the organization's marketing, image, and how we communicate our message to the general public.
I am happy about the latest edition of VALUNTEER magazine, though. (not sure why I had to add "valunteer" to the auto spell-check. I should probably write to the people who developed it.)
Quote from: JC004 on August 18, 2010, 12:28:44 AMThat is true of many things here. Interestingly, it doesn't get a fight here. Barely anyone will stick up for the logo. On the other hand, they will fight to the DEATH on uniforms and lots of other things.
Uniforms cost the members hard dollars, when they change something, sundown something, or muddy-up a specification that results in
having to unsew/sew or buy something, that get's people's attention.
Make me buy this thing? Then I'll care. (Yeah, I know, we all "buy" this stuff, but you know what I mean.) Replace the MAJCOM with this and people will start to care. Enough to complain and impact change? Probably not - we still have people wearing wing patches on their WHITES!?!
My guess is that this is the continued misguided idea that we need to be "less military looking" and more "stylish" in an effort to make us appear "with it" to younger potential members. Those of us who "get" this kind of stuff understand that a consistent message and visible execution of our missions would mean a lot more to recruiting than whether we have a Facebook page, but KAY-SARAH.
That may account for some of it, but a lot of folks spend a lot of time arguing about uniforms they say they don't even wear....
Quote from: RiverAux on August 18, 2010, 01:23:59 AM
That may account for some of it, but a lot of folks spend a lot of time arguing about uniforms they say they don't even wear....
I've seen much SM talk of outing my shoulderboards... But anyway.
My new squadron patch is Thingy-free, just so you know.
https://www.capnhq.gov/CAP.SealsEmblems.Web/Default.aspx
I have searched through this thread to ensure I didn't repeat, and so....
The Thingy is now listed as a commonly hated used symbol of the U.S. Civil Air Patrol.
We need to take action in numbers. These NHQ people don't realize a few emails amount to hundreds or even thousands of upset C.A.P. dues-paying members.
You
cannot define it as a commonly used symbol
just because:
- NHQ has been using it a lot regardless of its status as an unofficial symbol (then it disappears from the magazine cover again - huh?)
- CAPTalk members have anti-Triangle Thingy banners commonly used throughout the forum
It is
NOT a commonly used symbol because:
- The wings aren't using it (check out my analysis of this. When I did it, NONE of them were using it online)
- It's not official
- Whatever they do in the building in Alabama, it's pretty uncommon to see it in the field unless it's in a CAPTalk signature line or similar thing
Instead of putting it everywhere, making new copies of it, producing it in pointy medal, and generally adding more insanity to our current branding problem, why don't they just:
- Reduce the number of symbols used now
- Define usage of symbols, colors, spacing, etc. like serious organizations do
- Use the time devoted to creation/duplication of the Triangle Thingy to develop graphics for the field and put them online (Twitter avatars, business card templates, letterhead templates, subordinate unit web site graphics, etc.)
I think his point may have been that by putting it on the emblems/seals page for others to use NHQ has made it "official" in some sense of the word.
I don't think anyone here believes that that is enough...
Sir.
With all due respect, I said that the Thingy has been
listed as a
commonly used seal or emblem.
EDIT: This was incorrect. As a commonly used seal or emblem, it has been "made available." This supercedes my original post.This in no way represents
MY view of the Thingy, nor my assessment of its use.
On the top of the site which I linked for the members, the following is written.
Quote from: CAP Seals and EmblemsFor your convenience, theses commonly used seals and emblems have been made available for download.
Yes, it really says theses with an extra s. No, I did not embellish anything, with the exception of "emphasis mine."
Now, if you were addressing that towards the NHQ folks (considering you referenced them separately I doubt this is the case), then we can move on in our distaste and disgust with this emblem.
I was referencing their action, not your post.
Quote from: DakRadz on August 22, 2010, 12:23:55 AM
...
Quote from: CAP Seals and EmblemsFor your convenience, theses commonly used seals and emblems have been made available for download.
Yes, it really says theses with an extra s. No, I did not embellish anything, with the exception of "emphasis mine."
...
Also, awesome. I have e-mailed about mistakes like spelingz on the web sites but they never seemed to do any good.
Quote from: RiverAux on August 22, 2010, 12:17:08 AM
I think his point may have been that by putting it on the emblems/seals page for others to use NHQ has made it "official" in some sense of the word.
I don't think anyone here believes that that is enough...
Still missing...
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf
Anyone think Adam Savage has an NHQ fan club?
"I reject your reality and substitute my own."
:D
Quote from: RiverAux on August 22, 2010, 12:17:08 AM
I think his point may have been that by putting it on the emblems/seals page for others to use NHQ has made it "official" in some sense of the word.
I don't think anyone here believes that that is enough...
Not really- JC clarified he was aiming towards NHQ with his post (whew!), and I quoted the line I was referencing (written by NHQ), so that's cleared up.
Quote from: JC004 on August 22, 2010, 12:48:24 AM
Still missing...
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/R900_002_8A8354F4FD7C3.pdf
Glad it is- we can fight it without restraint so long as it's MIA, and NHQ has no defense other than "well we run the whole shebang..." >:D
heh. You should hear some of the ideas people have had for raising awareness and pressing the issue (kind of like the cards at the NB meeting idea above - I do like that one). Some were quite hilarious. I'll leave it up to the others to execute them, though - particularly anything related to the NB meeting since it's 3,000 miles from me.
One of the non-hilarious, but nonetheless good ideas that I've heard was an open letter concerning our branding in general and asking the National Board to take a serious look/effort without sending it to a committee to kill, wrap in red tape, create additional membership burdens, or generally spend all eternity marking time on the issue. As this goes unfixed, the cost will increase and the speed at which it can be repaired will drag out.
https://twitter.com/CivilAirPatrol
I don't know if this is official or not, but they worship NHQ and must be outed.
>:D I would certainly litter Kill The Triangle-Thingy business cards throughout the NB meeting spaces.... But I'm 2000 miles away and I can't visit Dad while school's in :'( (i.e. he lives in CA)
EDIT: The other unofficial Twitter page has it too! >:(
https://twitter.com/CAP_USAF_AUX
It could certainly use some adjustments to make the images for twitter instead of just "PASTE, OK - TWITTER DONE." But what do I know? I only haz 9 times as many followers and am on almost 500 lists. >:D ;D
They recently started appearing on some squadron award templates at our squadron, thankfully it was in the "rejected" designs pile.
Quote from: JC004 on May 24, 2010, 04:11:12 AM
It's a SEAL because they SAID.
Turn the Triangle Thingy upside-down. Then, compare it to this image. You will see.
(http://thenationalevil.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/monk-seal.jpg)
I like the picture, and I don't get why, no offense, a bunch of adults are arguing over a so-called "Triangle Thingy." And the added 'y' is something us kids would do.
PM.... will be sent.
I'm going to bed on this note... *Sigh*
Quote from: juicedude10 on August 27, 2010, 12:04:41 AM
I like the picture, and I don't get why, no offense, a bunch of adults are arguing over a so-called "Triangle Thingy." And the added 'y' is something us kids would do.
It goes far, far beyond the "Triangle Thingy". It's a branding issue, as a whole, that people are ticked off about. Uniforms, patches, logos... you name it. All we want is standardization, and when you've got NHQ staffers throwing in random insignia such as the Triangle Thingy, you do the opposite of standardize. You water down your image, confuse others, and eventually, upset your membership.
I mean, seriously, throughout my (almost) 6 years in CAP, we've gone through four changes to the MAJCOM-style patch worn on the flight suit... Is that really necessary? Hardly.
Well, part of that is/was AUX ON/OFF .. but alas, nothing to do with the Triangle Thingy that they just randomly started shoving in place of the 13 star seal which means a whole lot more than the product of someone being bored in class.
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on August 27, 2010, 03:04:31 PM
Quote from: juicedude10 on August 27, 2010, 12:04:41 AM
I like the picture, and I don't get why, no offense, a bunch of adults are arguing over a so-called "Triangle Thingy." And the added 'y' is something us kids would do.
It goes far, far beyond the "Triangle Thingy". It's a branding issue, as a whole, that people are ticked off about. Uniforms, patches, logos... you name it. All we want is standardization, and when you've got NHQ staffers throwing in random insignia such as the Triangle Thingy, you do the opposite of standardize. You water down your image, confuse others, and eventually, upset your membership.
I mean, seriously, throughout my (almost) 6 years in CAP, we've gone through four changes to the MAJCOM-style patch worn on the flight suit... Is that really necessary? Hardly.
Alright, thank you sir.
A lot of our current Uniform/Logo drama began when we received a new National Commander. I forget what his name was, but he's behind that TPU outfit.
:)
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on August 27, 2010, 03:04:31 PMI mean, seriously, throughout my (almost) 6 years in CAP, we've gone through four changes to the MAJCOM-style patch worn on the flight suit... Is that really necessary? Hardly.
It resulted in something akin to the end of "The Sneetches", by Dr. Seuss. I see all four patches in use. Looked at the ground handling video put out by national? Even thtey aren't keeping up with it. You see three flight suits and no two of the command patches are the same. One of them is still wearing the original round seal.
Quote from: PhoenixCadet on August 27, 2010, 03:04:31 PM
Quote from: juicedude10 on August 27, 2010, 12:04:41 AM
I like the picture, and I don't get why, no offense, a bunch of adults are arguing over a so-called "Triangle Thingy." And the added 'y' is something us kids would do.
It goes far, far beyond the "Triangle Thingy". It's a branding issue, as a whole, that people are ticked off about. Uniforms, patches, logos... you name it. All we want is standardization, and when you've got NHQ staffers throwing in random insignia such as the Triangle Thingy, you do the opposite of standardize. You water down your image, confuse others, and eventually, upset your membership.
I mean, seriously, throughout my (almost) 6 years in CAP, we've gone through four changes to the MAJCOM-style patch worn on the flight suit... Is that really necessary? Hardly.
Hey, National Board...are you listening to this
cadet? The cadets get it. Will you accept the challenge and make it a serious priority? It's about our recruiting, our image, our members' wallets. That means not spinning it in committees for years and not allowing it to continue spiraling out of control (such as the development and random use/non-use of the Triangle Thingy) while it gets fixed.
It seems many a member of the NB has tried leaving a legacy in a nameplate, a patch, or a ribbon over the past few years. Instead, leave a legacy in a uniform-uniform, a cohesive brand, a great marketing strategy, and an image for CAP with which we can identify and of which we can be
proud.
Quote from: JC004 on August 27, 2010, 11:26:49 PM
Hey, National Board...are you listening to this cadet? The cadets get it. Will you accept the challenge and make it a serious priority? It's about our recruiting, our image, our members' wallets. That means not spinning it in committees for years and not allowing it to continue spiraling out of control (such as the development and random use/non-use of the Triangle Thingy) while it gets fixed.
It seems many a member of the NB has tried leaving a legacy in a nameplate, a patch, or a ribbon over the past few years. Instead, leave a legacy in a uniform-uniform, a cohesive brand, a great marketing strategy, and an image for CAP with which we can identify and of which we can be proud.
They'll be a few minutes away from me next week... I'm up for leading a picket outside the hotel...
...just sayin'....
Heh.. picket. Thats along the lines of my comment earlier about leaving a calling card .. of sorts. Even if it's just a stack of flyers distributed in various places. ;)
But a lot more than just one place where someone can throw the pile away.
Any local folks know a hotel employee that works in, say, the audio-visual department?
Imagine a message appearing on all the hotel TV screens!
Man, it would be cool to sneak the kill-the-triangle symbol into the opening slides...
brilliant ideas
The official CAP Twitter site:
http://twitter.com/civilairpatrol
Quote from: JeffDG on September 02, 2010, 01:05:03 PM
The official CAP Twitter site:
http://twitter.com/civilairpatrol
QuoteUsafaux2004
@civilairpatrol death to the triangle-thingy! 12:19 AM Aug 31st via mobile web from South Loop, Chicago
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on September 02, 2010, 03:39:58 PM
Quote from: JeffDG on September 02, 2010, 01:05:03 PM
The official CAP Twitter site:
http://twitter.com/civilairpatrol
QuoteUsafaux2004
@civilairpatrol death to the triangle-thingy! 12:19 AM Aug 31st via mobile web from South Loop, Chicago
How long until there's a flood of those?
Vanguard is here at the NB, they've got a passel of'em. Coins, pins, shirts, jackets... arrrgh!
The triangle thingy is also on the NB name tags, banquet tickets, program and schedule. <Sigh>
Quote from: edmo1 on September 02, 2010, 05:21:08 PM
The triangle thingy is also on the NB name tags, banquet tickets, program and schedule. <Sigh>
Would such name tags be a violation of the Uniform Manual?
Not as long as they aren't used on a uniform.
Folks, please realize that there are probably as many people that like the triangle thingy as there are those that don't. The former just don't feel a need to be "vocal" about it...
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on September 02, 2010, 07:32:47 PM
Folks, please realize that there are probably as many people that like the triangle thingy as there are those that don't. The former just don't feel a need to be "vocal" about it...
While I'll admit that there aren't any scientific surveys about this, the amount of hatred expressed for the symbol here probably represents the most lopsided glimpse of public opinion that we've ever had on the board. Maybe you could get more people on the "no" side if you proposed bringing back the berry boards, but I doubt it.
More likely is that there are a significant number of CAP members who not thought about it at all. Those that have thought about it, don't seem to like it much.
Found one!!! On the 2010 national board banner above the podium
Quote from: RiverAux on September 02, 2010, 07:55:38 PM
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on September 02, 2010, 07:32:47 PM
Folks, please realize that there are probably as many people that like the triangle thingy as there are those that don't. The former just don't feel a need to be "vocal" about it...
While I'll admit that there aren't any scientific surveys about this, the amount of hatred expressed for the symbol here probably represents the most lopsided glimpse of public opinion that we've ever had on the board. Maybe you could get more people on the "no" side if you proposed bringing back the berry boards, but I doubt it.
More likely is that there are a significant number of CAP members who not thought about it at all. Those that have thought about it, don't seem to like it much.
That seems about right. It would seem for those who care about what our logos are and the dilution of CAP's brand, there is a far more concurring view on this than most anything I've ever seen on CAPTalk.
The highest population is probably those who've not thought about it (and probably won't), followed by those who dislike it, followed by those who like it. There is probably also a decent number of people who don't care so much about what the logo IS, but do think it's ridiculous that we don't have a professional brand. I've talked to quite a few of those.
In addition, the Triangle Thingy marks a continued separation from anything Air Force-style and many dislike that.
I would be willing to bet that among those who care, there are far more people who dislike it.
Quote from: Bluelakes 13 on September 02, 2010, 07:32:47 PM
Folks, please realize that there are probably as many people that like the triangle thingy as there are those that don't. The former just don't feel a need to be "vocal" about it...
And those are the same people that probably think that the Chevy HHR is a darned fine looking automobile...
If you don't get the above reference, Im saying that they have no taste.
The Triangle thingy is everywhere at the NB meeting. Every NHQ staff is wearing a polo shirt with the thingy embroided on it. It's also on every printed material, computer screen for registration, etc, etc and the list goes on. Very sad. This is by far the best example of the Gresham's law in action.
Me thinks we should have made up "Death to the Triangle Thingy" challenge coins to counter those from vanguard. I know I'd buy one. :)
Holy spinning triangle thingy!
Given what some are saying on this thread, when do you suppose that we will get new aircraft and van decals and a new MAJCOM patch?
I've been at the Nat Boards since Wednesday, and the place looks like someone took a machine gun loaded with various sized thingies, and sprayed it all over the place. Like Chickenman, "They're everywhere, they're everywhere!"
Dave: sounds like there is a message there, somehow. It looks like someone wants to get the message out with widest distribution. Too much trouble to do a ICL.
Maybe it's more Aux Off crap.
Ugh.
Elephino?
IMHO, that thingy is just plain fugly.
[my spell checker just puked on those two words!]
Is it true there is a huge Triangle Thingy hovering over San Diego, like the alien ships on Independence Day?
Kill the Triangle Thingy!!!
No.
Quote from: USAFaux2004 on September 03, 2010, 01:37:23 PM
Me thinks we should have made up "Death to the Triangle Thingy" challenge coins to counter those from vanguard. I know I'd buy one. :)
Ha. Actually...me too.
Quote from: bosshawk on September 04, 2010, 02:34:31 AM
Given what some are saying on this thread, when do you suppose that we will get new aircraft and van decals and a new MAJCOM patch?
Your move, NHQ. Do it. See how many more people get mad about the Triangle Thingy because we're wasting money on yet another decal. I propose that the Triangle Thingy's budget be frozen and used to send some cadets to Encampment or an NCSA.
Well, the Sandy Eggo rash has, for the moment, been eradicated. The triangle thingies have retreated, to live another day in another place.
:clap:
May it die a terrible death in transit.
So I was in DC this week (as I am often). Since I forgot my extra phone batteries and needed to work off and on with this project, I kept stopping at various Starbucks locations throughout the area. Let me tell you...Starbucks has so many logos and colors in use that it is almost impossible to find them. I mean...red, blue, green, orange, etc. How are you supposed to know?! And the logos! Circular! Square! Rectangular! Various polygons! Different fonts! When I was in Boston, I needed Pylon to guide me to Starbucks because I never would have found them otherwise. We were constantly discussing the inconsistency and lack of a standard. Yup - the Triangle Thingy is really consistent with some of the world's best marketers. [/sarcasm]
Judging from the number of Triangle Thingy's that were plastered on just about everything at the NB meeting in San Diego.
It's not going away anytime soon...
That was also the case with the stylized emblem that was being used for the race car (to some extent), the USAFAux command patch, and the U.S., then non-U.S. command patches. They were also ALL OVER the place. They were approved in SOME capacity (as a patch). The only thing I've ever seen close to "authorization" was a mention of it being ok for the proposed social media guidelines. There was, of course, the requirement to add it to the vehicles too, but that's just random (just like CAP's entire branding "strategy").
What irks me is how very simple it is to do a style guide. It also irks me that my money was being wasted to produce these stupid decals and all, only to change them a couple times shortly thereafter. We went from the seal to various command patches on the vans which had to cost a small fortune in production and mailing. Still the regulations are not updated to reflect this and some vehicles are even getting the Triangle Thingy. Then there is the fact that wings and even NHQ do not follow the limited guidance that we ALREADY have in place.
I had already produced some pretty freaking professional style guides and marketing plans for three non-profit programs when I was a 16 year old cadet. They can't do this? My methodology has changed since I was 16, but the basic outline for my current style guides and marketing plans still come out of what I did as a teenager because it was well researched and took from many different experts.
(http://dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/90000/8000/900/98954/98954.strip.print.gif)
http://dilbert.com/
My philosophy is to keep red tape where it belongs - in the National Archives gift shop:
http://estore.archives.gov/ProductInfo/N-07-3401.aspx
Quote from: JC004 on September 05, 2010, 09:34:33 PM
My philosophy is to keep red tape where it belongs - in the National Archives gift shop:
http://estore.archives.gov/ProductInfo/N-07-3401.aspx
Been there, saw that!!! Didn't buy... :'(
But you can buy it online and get the matching cuff links. I was there again on Thursday for the Civil War exhibit.
At this point, feeback needs to be provided direcetly to the following persons:
Julie DeBardelaben
Deputy Director of Public Affairs
CAP National Headquarters
1-877-227-9142, extension 250
jdebardelaben@capnhq.gov
Steve Cox
Public Affairs Manager
CAP National Headquarters
1-877-227-9142, extension 251
scox@capnhq.gov
And/or to:
paa@capnhq.gov
Quote from: JC004 on September 05, 2010, 09:34:33 PM
My philosophy is to keep red tape where it belongs - in the National Archives gift shop:
http://estore.archives.gov/ProductInfo/N-07-3401.aspx
That is tempting...
Quote from: A.Member on September 07, 2010, 03:38:28 PM
At this point, feeback needs to be provided direcetly to the following persons:
Julie DeBardelaben
Deputy Director of Public Affairs
CAP National Headquarters
1-877-227-9142, extension 250
jdebardelaben@capnhq.gov
Steve Cox
Public Affairs Manager
CAP National Headquarters
1-877-227-9142, extension 251
scox@capnhq.gov
And/or to:
paa@capnhq.gov
Emails and LETTERS sent!!! Yay.......it was fun being a CAP Member!!!!
Quote from: Patterson on September 08, 2010, 02:51:41 PM
Quote from: A.Member on September 07, 2010, 03:38:28 PM
At this point, feeback needs to be provided direcetly to the following persons:
Julie DeBardelaben
Deputy Director of Public Affairs
CAP National Headquarters
1-877-227-9142, extension 250
jdebardelaben@capnhq.gov
Steve Cox
Public Affairs Manager
CAP National Headquarters
1-877-227-9142, extension 251
scox@capnhq.gov
And/or to:
paa@capnhq.gov
Emails and LETTERS sent!!! Yay.......it was fun being a CAP Member!!!!
Let us know what the 2b says!
/sarcasm
I don't know what I'd say to them. They should know (or whoever it is...it may not have been they who decided this, so I use "they" generally) that they have to follow the regulation that we do have in place and they should know about professional practices like a style guide. I wouldn't write them a nasty note because 1. I don't have all of the background, 2. I wouldn't want them to feel personally attacked because it's not a personal thing - it's an ongoing problem that has just been growing for many years now, getting much worse with the Triangle Thingy.
This is really about a chronic issue that hasn't been addressed by our governing bodies and falls on the shoulders of many groups rather than just a few individuals. Really, the National Board should take action to get additional guidance approved above what we already have. That's where this should fall. They should also have someone enforcing the things that are already in place, since they are not followed from the flight/squadron on up to NHQ itself.
Quote from: A.Member on September 07, 2010, 03:38:28 PM
At this point, feeback needs to be provided direcetly to the following persons:
Julie DeBardelaben
Deputy Director of Public Affairs
CAP National Headquarters
1-877-227-9142, extension 250
jdebardelaben@capnhq.gov
Steve Cox
Public Affairs Manager
CAP National Headquarters
1-877-227-9142, extension 251
scox@capnhq.gov
And/or to:
paa@capnhq.gov
Only if you are not a public affairs officer and like jumping the CAP chain of command.
Quote from: RiverAux on September 08, 2010, 07:55:50 PM
Only if you are not a public affairs officer and like jumping the CAP chain of command.
The folks at NHQ are not in our chain of command and we aren't in theirs any more than the CAP-USAF folks are.
They are there to support the volunteers, not to support only the corporate officers. How many times a day do people call NHQ with questions? Hundreds, from the mundane "where do I order patches" to "I went to encampment in 1951 and want credit."
People can call and ask questions, give comments, etc all day long without it being "jumping the chain."
Quote from: jimmydeanno on September 08, 2010, 08:06:08 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on September 08, 2010, 07:55:50 PM
Only if you are not a public affairs officer and like jumping the CAP chain of command.
The folks at NHQ are not in our chain of command and we aren't in theirs any more than the CAP-USAF folks are.
They are there to support the volunteers, not to support only the corporate officers. How many times a day do people call NHQ with questions? Hundreds, from the mundane "where do I order patches" to "I went to encampment in 1951 and want credit."
People can call and ask questions, give comments, etc all day long without it being "jumping the chain."
Agreed.
I assume everyone is an adult and can address the issue tactfully...none of which should have you worried about a 2b.
As for what to write, it could be something along these lines (feel free to copy and modify as needed):
QuoteDear Ms. DeBardelaben:
I'm writing to provide member based feedback on the Triangle "logo" that recently appeared in a number of publications from NHQ:
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:LIFfxBb0CI1sPM:http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/triprop_triangle_8A060A3F481B6.jpg)
This new image does not appear in the regulation that defines our long established seals or emblems (CAPR 900-2) nor do I recall any approvals to amend this regulation in the last several years. As such, I'm hoping you can shed some light as to it's origin and the intent for it's use.
Recently, there has been considerable on-line discussion by CAP members and interested parties related to this image - most of which is very unfavorable as to it's continued use: http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=10555.200
I share the opinion that the use of this unapproved image significantly dilutes and harms the Civil Air Patrol brand. I welcome the idea that returns us to the use of only the recognized and approved seals and emblems that have long represented the Civil Air Patrol brand, such as those defined in CAPR 900-2. The use of the command shield which is rooted in Air Force history and appears on every CAP member's utility uniform as a patch, as well as on our airplanes and vehicles, serves to reinforce a common brand image. The Triangle image, on the other hand, simply does not and cannot provide this value.
The lack of consistency as it pertains to our brand image is an ongoing issue with the organization and is increasingly a source of frustration for a number of members. The production of a style guide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Style_guide) (standard industry practice - ex. Univ. of Pennsylvania (http://www.business-services.upenn.edu/publicationservices/pdf/logostyleguide.pdf)) for approved graphical brand representations of Civil Air Patrol by NHQ would go a long way in addressing this issue of consistency. Such a guide would provide a level of specificity around these images that is currently absent in regulations or publications.
I appreciate your time and dedication to the organization and look forward to your response. Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Best Regards,
A.Member
My Reply received this afternoon
QuoteThe Prop and Triangle has historically been associated with the CAP since the formation of the organization. It is a branding moniker initiated by the former National Commander to instill a sense of pride and historical appreciation for the CAP, its members both present and prior. Thank you for your interest in ........some more words follow......
I do not believe the "prop and triangle" looked like the one currently in use and I would sway away from using the word "moniker" in this context.
I would imagine the replies others receive will be very similar.
^ It has not been used in the design that is currently being propagated.
I don't understand. Unless something happened to Maj Gen Courter that they aren't sharing, the previous National CC initiated a lot of things (that's probably all that I have to say about that). But under T.P., we got shields. What does this Thingy have to do with anything(y)?
They also initiated "U.S." for one thing. That went well.
The Triangle Thingy now replaces the official seal of Civil Air Patrol on Certificates of Appreciation, apparently.
Since members in the field need to produce things with logos - letterheads, web sites, etc., one would think they would state if they wished this new logo to be used. Of course, NHQ is not even using this all the time and it remains off some things. So...huh? It's not even a question of the Triangle Thingy or any other such thing. It's a question of branding strategy, consistency, lack of instructions, not following 900-2 - all that.
Received the following reply to my inquiry from Julie DeBardelaben:
"I appreciate your taking the time to email this input. I will look into this matter and get back to you."
I view this response as encouraging and I'm very appreciative of her willingness to follow up further on this issue.
Quote from: jimmydeanno on September 08, 2010, 08:06:08 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on September 08, 2010, 07:55:50 PM
Only if you are not a public affairs officer and like jumping the CAP chain of command.
The folks at NHQ are not in our chain of command and we aren't in theirs any more than the CAP-USAF folks are.
They are there to support the volunteers, not to support only the corporate officers. How many times a day do people call NHQ with questions? Hundreds, from the mundane "where do I order patches" to "I went to encampment in 1951 and want credit."
People can call and ask questions, give comments, etc all day long without it being "jumping the chain."
This is a little different than having a question about how to process a membership application or some technical issue.
I think we can assume that the paid NHQ staff did not come up with the triangle thingy and start using it without the approval of someone in the CAP chain of command. If that is the case, then comments should be addressed through the CoC to get it changed. They're not going to be able to change anything and going through them bypasses the proper channels.
Now, if they did start using this without proper approval, thats a whole different story.
Quote from: RiverAux on September 09, 2010, 04:02:54 AM
Quote from: jimmydeanno on September 08, 2010, 08:06:08 PM
Quote from: RiverAux on September 08, 2010, 07:55:50 PM
Only if you are not a public affairs officer and like jumping the CAP chain of command.
The folks at NHQ are not in our chain of command and we aren't in theirs any more than the CAP-USAF folks are.
They are there to support the volunteers, not to support only the corporate officers. How many times a day do people call NHQ with questions? Hundreds, from the mundane "where do I order patches" to "I went to encampment in 1951 and want credit."
People can call and ask questions, give comments, etc all day long without it being "jumping the chain."
This is a little different than having a question about how to process a membership application or some technical issue.
I think we can assume that the paid NHQ staff did not come up with the triangle thingy and start using it without the approval of someone in the CAP chain of command. If that is the case, then comments should be addressed through the CoC to get it changed. They're not going to be able to change anything and going through them bypasses the proper channels.
Now, if they did start using this without proper approval, thats a whole different story.
How much autonomy, do you suppose, was given the editors of "The CAP Volunteer?" It may be that this logo was developed as a "publication" instrument and simply "caught fire."
I would imagine that some of the "clip art" and other imagery found in the magazine might not fall under the guise of CAP Regs...no more than having a certain font, style of punctuation or writing style would. The "Thingy" have got away from people who spawned it...it happened before.
Quote from: Major Carrales on September 09, 2010, 04:30:12 AM
How much autonomy, do you suppose, was given the editors of "The CAP Volunteer?" It may be that this logo was developed as a "publication" instrument and simply "caught fire."
I would imagine that some of the "clip art" and other imagery found in the magazine might not fall under the guise of CAP Regs...no more than having a certain font, style of punctuation or writing style would. The "Thingy" have got away from people who spawned it...it happened before.
That is where it originally was found and exclusively there for a while. As I've cited before...remember that the other things that got used heavily for a while like the race car-era stylized emblem (to some extent), the AF symbol with nested CAP logos (before the current 900-2 was approved), and the command patches just sort of popped up, then grew through various publications and such.
The race car-era emblem was on the web site for a while. (Ref: http://web.archive.org/web/20040113051106/http://www.cap.gov/).
This was not an approved CAP logo EITHER by regulation. The command patches have never been approved as a logo. This is why I say that this is
not about the Triangle Thingy - this is about the lack of a standard - a style guide in particular. Clearly NHQ does not have a style guide. If they DO have one, they don't use it. Either way, one needs to be approved by the entities authorized to approve such things (namely, the National Board) and distributed to the field because the subordinate units NEED to create things with the logo.
This is not a dream like some have of making the closest-to-AF style uniform possible, a fancy new expensive aircraft, or a new program/partnership. It's an industry standard.
My concern is whether or not they (again, a general "they" - applied to subordinate units on up) can follow the standard. It HAS to be enforced. As we saw here, we have a wing letterhead with an Air Force emblem combo that violates Air Force and CAP standards for that. Squadrons have produced many things that violated this standard. NHQ has produced many things - from PPT presentations to printed publications that violate this standard. All that and the Air Force CLEARLY defines usage of this symbol (http://www.trademark.af.mil/).
So there are SEVERAL issues here - not just that they have produced YET AGAIN another logo and are using it extensively. The key issues here are:
- diluting the brand
- inconsistent usage of CAP logos
- lack of a standard, lack of adherence to industry standards
- lack of enforcement
- NOT following the already-approved written guidance (900-2)
- usage of unauthorized logos being an ongoing issue for many years as we can see with the link above, the former extensive use of the AF symbol combo, command patches, and many other examples
As a quick example of this, here is an analysis of Annual Reports to Congress since 2000 and what main logo was used in them:
- 2000: corporate seal
- 2001: corporate seal
- 2002: stylized race car emblem (unauthorized logo), seal on back cover
- 2003: corporate seal
- 2004: corporate seal on front cover, stylized emblem throughout (variance from 900-2 standard)
- 2005: authorized (!) emblem
- 2006: command patch with "U.S." (a patch, not a logo of course)
- 2007: command patch without "U.S." (a patch, not a logo of course)
- 2008 financial statement: Triangle Thingy
- 2009 financial statement: Triangle Thingy
This of course does not include the other publications used during those time periods. With annual reports, it began in 2002.
I've asked this question in some other threads and nobody has yet answered directly.
Putting aside the intelligence (or obvious lack thereof) of diluting your brand, what regulation is violated by the use of TTT? As I see it, 900-2 only deals with allowed use of official logos, which TTT is not, so is not covered by 900-2.
Is there another reg that I'm missing?
I don't know if it violates a regulation or not and frankly I don't really care. The fact remains that this is not one of our official symbols (which are perfectly fine as is) and we should not be using it even if doing so isn't "illegal". Using such non-standard symbols dilutes a brand we have been building since WWII and makes it harder for folks to get the job done.
Quote from: RiverAux on September 21, 2010, 07:02:59 PM
I don't know if it violates a regulation or not and frankly I don't really care. The fact remains that this is not one of our official symbols (which are perfectly fine as is) and we should not be using it even if doing so isn't "illegal". Using such non-standard symbols dilutes a brand we have been building since WWII and makes it harder for folks to get the job done.
Hence my comment about setting aside the intelligence (or obvious lack thereof) of diluting your brand.
But reading many comments, people seem to take it as a given that it violates the regs, and I'm trying to understand where that impression comes from, as I cannot find a prohibition in the regs WRT to this.
The TTT says "Civil Air Patrol around the three edges, thus CAP Inc holds the trademark rights. Major brands often change their logos or symbols to bring them into the 21st century. But I see no reason for CAP to drop a 69 year emblem for the TTT
Quote from: BillB on September 21, 2010, 07:57:07 PM
The TTT says "Civil Air Patrol around the three edges, thus CAP Inc holds the trademark rights. Major brands often change their logos or symbols to bring them into the 21st century. But I see no reason for CAP to drop a 69 year emblem for the TTT
That depends on where the TTT is spotted. There are a number of places where 900-2 permits the use of the name "Civil Air Patrol". including "All official CAP publications (through squadron level)", "Stationary of any CAP unit or authorized committee", "Signs identifying CAP units at all levels", and "Posters and other informational or recruiting materials issued by National Headquarters".
The use of the name is actually permitted pretty broadly, with the only prohibition being "will not be used for personal gain"
RiverAux summed it up pretty nicely. We have been saying that:
1. The Triangle Thingy is fail.
2. There is a big identity problem that spans many topics. This includes the lack of a style guide, disregard for the EXISTING regulation (900-2), inconsistency in usage of symbols as a whole, etc. The problem is more that than the actual logo that is currently in use often (but no always).
As far as the issue of 900-2 prohibiting the production of new logos without them being official, I take RiverAux's position as well as the position that the spirit of the regulation is to provide guidance on the identity of the corporation in name and symbols. The Triangle Thingy goes outside that.
I don't know why there has to be some strict prohibition since that isn't the issue. It's not like someone is calling for the firing of NHQ staff members for creating or using the Triangle Thingy and therefore there must be a rule that was broken. The main issue is the identity crisis. After that, the issues of the Triangle Thingy sucking, its lack of official status, etc. For some, there is a conspiracy theory about an organized effort to distance us even further from the AF but since they haven't organized themselves enough to pick a corporate color scheme...yeaaaaah. I've seen it as, and tried to communicate it as an ongoing identity issue that spans many years and many commanders, staff people, and National Boards. I don't even think that any of the current wing commanders were in their positions on the NB when this started.
Since JC004 is having some kind of issue with hosts/providers/registrars as the domain has a parking page, ... and is expired-
You can change your signature here:
http://captalk.net/index.php?action=profile;area=forumprofile (http://captalk.net/index.php?action=profile;area=forumprofile)
..and change the TT Logo:
http://17500mph.com/CAPTalkKTTT.png (http://17500mph.com/CAPTalkKTTT.png)
I've always had my own on there since I redrew it in the early hours of it's debut-
My domain is fixed now. People can use whichever. Whatever you do, take a stand against the destruction of the CAP brand. ...Or more correctly, stand for having SOME brand instead of just random logos and slogans that change constantly.
It has invaded the NESA site. Sorry folks, I don't think it's going away...
The traingle thingy is the only logo or symbol that appears on the handouts to be given out on this week's Legislative Day in DC.
http://www.capmembers.com/cap_national_hq/cap_reports/
Mike
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on March 02, 2011, 04:54:34 PM
It has invaded the NESA site. Sorry folks, I don't think it's going away...
I think sarflyer could get that fixed.
Well, you don't want to be using official stuff for national materials. That's silly.
Quote from: sardak on March 02, 2011, 05:15:06 PM
The traingle thingy is the only logo or symbol that appears on the handouts to be given out on this week's Legislative Day in DC.
Anybody know why NVWG's report was removed?
Probably contained information about Area 51.
Jeeze, whats going on at NHQ? Crummy CMS systems, 'CAP Cares' graphics, un-official logos being slapped all over stuff? What next?
I really miss the round Corporate Seal we used to have on our vehicles. How much will be spent to switch to the triangle? That thing looks ridiculous.
If they switch to the triangle I'm tearing up my '75 and not driving corporate vehicles. ;)
They do not appear to be looking at authorizing its use on vehicles since the proposal supposedly has zero cost associated with it. Producing and changing decals would cost money.
I submitted a question via the KB. Lets see what I get back.
QuoteWhat is the history behind the "Citizens Serving Communities" emblem? When was it approved, and for what purpose was it done?
What guidelines are in place for the use of this graphic?
The item in question is available from:
https://www.capnhq.gov/CAP.SealsEmblems.Web/Default.aspx - Currently in the bottom row, left-most item.
Quote from: JC004 on June 07, 2010, 04:30:26 AM
Ack. The CAC has it too.
http://cac.cap.gov/
In addition to that, they're making their own seals:
(http://cac.cap.gov/images/Seal%20of%20the%20Chairman%20-%20Black%20Background.jpg)
I think we're teaching them wrong about branding. :'(
OK, that's just a big ego trip. No cadet needs his or her own logo or seal. No wing or region directorate needs one, either. UNITS get them, and special missions might, but that should be it. We have so many goofy logos floating around, we don't know what to do with them. And then we have units that are direct reports to others -- like the NOC -- that should be hewing closer to their mother unit's insignia. If they need one of their own.
As for the "triangle thingy"? It's lousy. It's unnecessary. It's illegal. But apparently, the silo that is National Headquarters is perfectly fine doing their own thing, separate from the volunteers who live under a different set of guidelines. So much for being on the same team.
Anyone notice, it's on the agenda for the NEC to adopt TTT later this month.
I submitted a question to the KB about that TT and after getting two notices about it being referred to someone else, I've not heard anything else. The submission was on 13-April. It was right before I came across the discussion here about it being an agenda item.
Just what we need, another danged optional symbol to use. Pick one of the fine ones that we have, and USE it. We don't need another one that looks like someone spent all of 18 minutes with Paint, and is ugly at that.
At least they ditched it off the magazine cover.
Quote from: JeffDG on April 23, 2011, 11:13:12 PM
Anyone notice, it's on the agenda for the NEC to adopt TTT later this month.
I think that people should contact their colonels and tell them to vote against this insanity. How about at least tabling the proposal until there is a COMPLETE branding document proposed, including all the the standard style guide elements like Pantone colors, spacing, examples of correct/incorrect usage, etc.
Adopting the Triangle Thingy and not addressing its use, the current symbols, or the overall branding strategy is RIDICULOUS and if it is done, there should be SIGNIFICANT complaints from the membership about this.
Please folks, support the killing of the Triangle Thingy. Add the below graphic to your signature line on CAPTalk (linking from my site direct is fine) and contact your colonels. Also write to the marketing people (be nice) and tell them that they need to consider a COMPLETE branding document (style guide) addressing ALL of CAP's symbols, not simply officiate this silly logo. Do you really want the time and expense of having this approved, then later rescinded? Do you know what waste will be involved with putting this on CAP vehicles and the like? Replacing letterheads? Updating web sites? Let's make sure it's done RIGHT and it is done as a COMPLETE branding initiative for the organization, WITH membership feedback and sufficient time for it.
Add the Kill The Triangle Thingy banner to your signature on CAPTalk by adding the following code:
[img]http://colganmarketing.com/kill.png[/img]RALLY THE TROOPS!
Quote from: JC004 on April 24, 2011, 08:38:24 AM
Please folks, support the killing of the Triangle Thingy. Add the below graphic to your signature line on CAPTalk.
Done!
eServices has a new graphic under the Member Search (Restricted) application, that has a giant portal-person-icon-like graphic on it. The TT is on the shirt pocket.
All the banners I've seen in the NCC photos have it, too.
It's creeping out of the woodwork.
Why does NHQ get to decide the branding for the organization without an authorized change? Why can't they use things consistently? It's a joke. Just because there isn't a style guide doesn't mean 900-2 doesn't apply.
Didn't they put the whole triangle thing on hold at the NEC? If thats the case, shouldn't they have slowed down on using it in new places?
Quote from: JC004 on June 14, 2011, 11:04:02 PM
Why does NHQ get to decide the branding for the organization without an authorized change? Why can't they use things consistently? It's a joke. Just because there isn't a style guide doesn't mean 900-2 doesn't apply.
What makes you think NHQ Staff care what the NB/NEC do? Their lines of authority don't pass through anyone from those bodies.
Quote from: JeffDG on June 15, 2011, 02:51:19 AM
Quote from: JC004 on June 14, 2011, 11:04:02 PM
Why does NHQ get to decide the branding for the organization without an authorized change? Why can't they use things consistently? It's a joke. Just because there isn't a style guide doesn't mean 900-2 doesn't apply.
What makes you think NHQ Staff care what the NB/NEC do? Their lines of authority don't pass through anyone from those bodies.
Which means they get to just do whatever and can ignore the regulations that govern the organization? I guess they could just add, for instance, a new mission of the organization, publish some guides, and boom - stick it on the membership. Great.
Quote from: JC004 on June 15, 2011, 04:40:07 AM
Quote from: JeffDG on June 15, 2011, 02:51:19 AM
Quote from: JC004 on June 14, 2011, 11:04:02 PM
Why does NHQ get to decide the branding for the organization without an authorized change? Why can't they use things consistently? It's a joke. Just because there isn't a style guide doesn't mean 900-2 doesn't apply.
What makes you think NHQ Staff care what the NB/NEC do? Their lines of authority don't pass through anyone from those bodies.
Which means they get to just do whatever and can ignore the regulations that govern the organization? I guess they could just add, for instance, a new mission of the organization, publish some guides, and boom - stick it on the membership. Great.
Not really.
The regulations govern the
volunteer side of the organization, not the NHQ staff. NHQ staff for instance are not required to wear CAP uniforms. You need to look at the org chart...none of the NHQ staff report to or through any of the volunteers in any way. The decisions of the NB and NEC are not binding in any way upon the NHQ staff.
The only governing body with authority over the NHQ staff is the BoG, because the Executive Director is appointed and/or relieved by the BoG. The Executive Director is a peer of the National Commander, not a subordinate.
Quote from: JeffDG on June 17, 2011, 12:53:01 AM
The regulations govern the volunteer side of the organization, not the NHQ staff. NHQ staff for instance are not required to wear CAP uniforms. You need to look at the org chart...none of the NHQ staff report to or through any of the volunteers in any way. The decisions of the NB and NEC are not binding in any way upon the NHQ staff.
The only governing body with authority over the NHQ staff is the BoG, because the Executive Director is appointed and/or relieved by the BoG. The Executive Director is a peer of the National Commander, not a subordinate.
As much as some wish this was not so, it is. However, the EX and CC must work together for CAP to work. And, it is the BoG which "enforces" this cooperation.
The BoG does let the day to day policy making of CAP to be made by the NEC/NB. It is the responsibility of the staff at NHQ to do the leg work, logistically. Their job is to manage what the volunteers need. The only conflicts between the volunteers and corporate staff may occur when government funds are involved. The EX is bound to enforce funding rules and, by law, can only spend on what is allowed by the SECAF/CSAF.
Branding and Marketing are not considered in that category so, I have no idea why there seems to be a disconnect (if any exists). If the NEC/NB wants to end "the triangle thingy", NHQ staff should comply.
Quote from: JeffDG on June 17, 2011, 12:53:01 AM
Quote from: JC004 on June 15, 2011, 04:40:07 AM
Quote from: JeffDG on June 15, 2011, 02:51:19 AM
Quote from: JC004 on June 14, 2011, 11:04:02 PM
Why does NHQ get to decide the branding for the organization without an authorized change? Why can't they use things consistently? It's a joke. Just because there isn't a style guide doesn't mean 900-2 doesn't apply.
What makes you think NHQ Staff care what the NB/NEC do? Their lines of authority don't pass through anyone from those bodies.
Which means they get to just do whatever and can ignore the regulations that govern the organization? I guess they could just add, for instance, a new mission of the organization, publish some guides, and boom - stick it on the membership. Great.
Not really.
The regulations govern the volunteer side of the organization, not the NHQ staff. NHQ staff for instance are not required to wear CAP uniforms. You need to look at the org chart...none of the NHQ staff report to or through any of the volunteers in any way. The decisions of the NB and NEC are not binding in any way upon the NHQ staff.
The only governing body with authority over the NHQ staff is the BoG, because the Executive Director is appointed and/or relieved by the BoG. The Executive Director is a peer of the National Commander, not a subordinate.
I know what the organization chart says. I asked if that means that NHQ staff can just arbitrarily do whatever they want, even when that does not comply with the organization's standards. So you're telling me they can order new letterhead or aircraft decals and whatever they pick is fine, right? There may be established standards for aircraft paint and decals, but since they're responsible for ordering them, they can just order and send out "U.S. Civil Air Patrol" decals for the aircraft, right?
That's great. No wonder things are so well off. I know a lot of volunteer organizations in which the paid staff just do whatever. Or not.
Today's AFB comic.
(http://www.afblues.com/wordpress/comics/2011-06-27.jpg)
LMAO.
Not the triangle thingy.
https://www.capnhq.gov/CAP.SealsEmblems.Web/Default.aspx
They added it to the official emblems page. You'll have to log in to see it.
I think thats been there a while. After all, those other places outside of NHQ that are using it, had to have gotten it from somewhere.
It was all over at NCC, and I really wish I had a big rubber stamp.. That would have been fun. :)
Heh...
(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/large/0000000CAP0920M_LRG.jpg)
http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-holiday-ornament-with-civil-air-patrol-logo-p-15846.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-holiday-ornament-with-civil-air-patrol-logo-p-15846.html)
There's handful of other new stuff, some of it pretty sharp.
http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-new-items-c-6_2496.html&items_per_page=120 (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-new-items-c-6_2496.html&items_per_page=120)
I like the sound of the Sport Tek polos as long as they don't have TTT on them.
Quote from: Spaceman3750 on October 04, 2011, 12:59:30 AM
I like the sound of the Sport Tek polos as long as they don't have TTT on them.
I bet they will, and I bet they will cause the same uniform misunderstandings that the button-down shirts continue to cause.
(http://img812.imageshack.us/img812/8347/0000000cap0920mlrg.jpg)
There, fixed that.
Quote from: Eclipse on October 04, 2011, 12:56:01 AM
Heh...
(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/large/0000000CAP0920M_LRG.jpg)
http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-holiday-ornament-with-civil-air-patrol-logo-p-15846.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-holiday-ornament-with-civil-air-patrol-logo-p-15846.html)
There's handful of other new stuff, some of it pretty sharp.
http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-new-items-c-6_2496.html&items_per_page=120 (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-new-items-c-6_2496.html&items_per_page=120)
That's friggin' hideous. I hope it's not one of the items you consider to be "pretty sharp".
Quote from: Eclipse on October 04, 2011, 12:56:01 AM
Heh...
(http://www.vanguardmil.com/images/large/0000000CAP0920M_LRG.jpg)
http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-holiday-ornament-with-civil-air-patrol-logo-p-15846.html (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-holiday-ornament-with-civil-air-patrol-logo-p-15846.html)
There's handful of other new stuff, some of it pretty sharp.
http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-new-items-c-6_2496.html&items_per_page=120 (http://www.vanguardmil.com/civil-air-patrol-new-items-c-6_2496.html&items_per_page=120)
Wow! This is cool! I'll get one for a Christmas present for our testing officer at the squadron. He'll love it! >:D
If it comes like I fixed it, I'll even put it on a tree!
(http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/2769/barfq.png)
Quote from: A.Member on October 04, 2011, 03:02:39 AMThat's friggin' hideous. I hope it's not one of the items you consider to be "pretty sharp".
It's not - I was talking about the new coins and a few other things.
http://caphistory.blogspot.com/2010_04_01_archive.html (http://caphistory.blogspot.com/2010_04_01_archive.html)
Quote"The winning entry in Civil Air Patrol's contest seeking a theme or logo, or both, for the 2011 Annual Conference has been selected. The winner receives free registration for the conference"
(http://www.capvolunteernow.com/file.cfm/media/news/NHQwinninglogo_5918DD4E6B1E4.jpg)
http://www.capvolunteernow.com/news.cfm/logo_unveiled_for_2011_annual_conference_70th_cap_anniversary?show=news&newsID=10407 (http://www.capvolunteernow.com/news.cfm/logo_unveiled_for_2011_annual_conference_70th_cap_anniversary?show=news&newsID=10407)
Wow.
It looks cheesy and I don't particularly care for it, regardless of TTT.
Now I'm off to find the Capt.'s email so as to inform him he is paying for my registration, since I had to look at this. ;D
Thats old already, but still gross. Sad that is all the talent pool could come up with. It does look cheesy. Though I'm of the opinion that whats dragging it down for me is TTT.
Cool......I can wear it on my uniform?
Quote from: a2capt on October 09, 2011, 04:04:30 PM
Thats old already, but still gross. Sad that is all the talent pool could come up with. It does look cheesy. Though I'm of the opinion that whats dragging it down for me is TTT.
Perhaps it was an unwritten requirement that that THING be used in the logo.
Unwritten. IE - the 'judges' just threw out any entries devoid of TTT.
I swear, that thing is just plain hideous. It's a product of someone had too much leeway, and probably good intentions, but created that thing without regards to consistency, and then they had the chutzpah to put it on the cover of the magazine for a few issues. Ug-ly. Because someone wanted something 'cute' for some conference, and now we're stuck with the hideous thing. It pays pretty much zero heritage to our organization. It serves to further dilute the pool of recognition, if anything. Maybe whoever did it got the idea after being stuck behind a farm implement, or Amish buggy on a two lane switch back road in the mountains with a double yellow down the middle.
chutzpah...LOL
I think that more people should add the anti-TTT thing to their forum signature. Just saying.
Well, I'm getting bored with mine, so it will likely get replaced in the next few days.
The agenda is out for next month's NEC meeting. The ad-hoc committee on TTT will be presenting its report under old business.
Mike
Quote from: SarDragon on October 15, 2011, 01:21:08 AM
Well, I'm getting bored with mine, so it will likely get replaced in the next few days.
You made yours. Perhaps you should try a different one.
Quote from: JC004 on October 15, 2011, 03:41:36 AM
Quote from: SarDragon on October 15, 2011, 01:21:08 AM
Well, I'm getting bored with mine, so it will likely get replaced in the next few days.
You made yours. Perhaps you should try a different one.
Nope. I snatched it from someone else. Don't recall who. It's gonna be history shortly.
The stupid ugly thug isn't going anywhere.. Not at the rate of acceptance and ignoration of the current style gui.. Oh, snap! There isn't one. :(
So their first order of business will be to get some form of official recognition for this ...thing... and that becomes the first entry in their now publication.
There is *nothing* wrong with the roundel. Nothing. If we need another one, it should be a committee item, and the rules should be nothing integrated from the past ones, otherwise, why do we need a new one?
That 70th anniversary logo is not going on anything I have any involvement in for our December open house.
Quote from: a2capt on October 15, 2011, 03:13:33 PM
The stupid ugly thug isn't going anywhere.. Not at the rate of acceptance and ignoration of the current style gui.. Oh, snap! There isn't one. :(
So their first order of business will be to get some form of official recognition for this ...thing... and that becomes the first entry in their now publication.
There is *nothing* wrong with the roundel. Nothing. If we need another one, it should be a committee item, and the rules should be nothing integrated from the past ones, otherwise, why do we need a new one?
That 70th anniversary logo is not going on anything I have any involvement in for our December open house.
Shame on you! What are you doing on CAP Talk when you should be studying hard at NSC. Get back to work son.
(http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/5820/tttee.jpg)
Well, prepare for a massive influx of cadets since we're not using one of those scary military symbols there....
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1715581376664&set=t.704845746&type=1&theater (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1715581376664&set=t.704845746&type=1&theater)
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=165117253518928&set=a.157763430920977.30925.156363627727624&type=3&theater (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=165117253518928&set=a.157763430920977.30925.156363627727624&type=3&theater)
(http://idahoptv.org/dialogue4kids/images/season10/senses/ewww_yech.gif)