Unfortunately for Tfl, it’s a reasonable response in the context of their request – even if it is unlikely to help improve services on the London Underground.
Of course, we’re being a little harsh here – you could argue that the humour of the response arises from a deliberate misunderstanding of the heading in context, rather than a glaring UX ambiguity. But the lack of specifics in the heading – the white-on-blue strapline is easily missed – does open Tfl up to this sort of reaction.
And the gag also makes an interesting point about our changing attitudes to calls to action and feedback.
In our post-digital age, when we see a message directly soliciting a reaction, we expect to be able to respond instantly – to point or like or comment, or share or retweet. This is easier in digital than in print, of course, but there are a variety of mechanisms designed to bridge the gap, such as QR codes and Blippar. There are other, less cutting-edge ways too: requests for feedback from card payment machines, for instance, or customer-service smiley buttons you can bash while you’re queuing up to buy something in WH Smith.
All of these strategies are ways of showing that you care what your users think – to the point of providing the means by which they can instantly give feedback. Indeed, not providing the means to feed back instantly will soon seem worse than not asking for feedback at all. To write ‘tell us what you think’ in any medium – with no immediate mechanism of doing so – will come to seem unhelpful to the point of rudeness.