Triangle thingy spottings

[a2capt]

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.

[JC004]

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Do you really want the time and expense of having this approved, then later rescinded?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:

Code Select Expand

[img]http://colganmarketing.com/kill.png[/img]

RALLY THE TROOPS!

[commando1]

Please folks, support the killing of the Triangle Thingy.  Add the below graphic to your signature line on CAPTalk.

Done!

[a2capt]

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.

[JC004]

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.

[RiverAux]

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?

[JeffDG]

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.

[JC004]

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.

[JeffDG]

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.

[FW]

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.

[JC004]

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.

[Lancer]

Today's AFB comic.

[Майор Хаткевич]

LMAO.

Not the triangle thingy.

[DakRadz]

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.

[a2capt]

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.

[Eclipse]

Heh...



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

[Spaceman3750]

I like the sound of the Sport Tek polos as long as they don't have TTT on them.

[Eclipse]

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.

[a2capt]

There, fixed that.

[A.Member]

Heh...



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

That's friggin' hideous.   I hope it's not one of the items you consider to be "pretty sharp".