Don't like blocking of "closed" systems

Honestly, preventing people form viewing a system is a HUGE turnoff to those who are NOT the system’s vendors. C2 is being judge and jury, like the C2 user community is not allowed to see a system, just because it closes to new subscribers.

Who says a system won’t open up in the future??? how can people track it? This site is about finding the very very few interesting systems.

This seems like using a club to kill a housefly. If a system allows no one, i can understand shutting off views. OR if it aggressively shunts people to its private website. But you made a global decision for all of us. Didn’t those sites pay their $98 listing fee? Why aren’t we allowed to see then, then?

I agree it’s not ideal. I understand exactly what MK is trying to achieve but I wonder if there isn’t another way to do this. Even if someone isn’t able to subscribe to a system they should still be able to view it.

Right now on the Best Systems list regardless of asset class my systems are numbers 3, 4, and 6 under long-term but unless i remove the cap (at zero for regulatory reasons) or permission it no-one would be able to view the system or it’s stats.

It seems to me if you’re going to do this you should go all the way and make them ineligible for inclusion on those lists or The Grid, otherwise people have a means to locate them and then when they go to view it they can’t, I’m not sure what that really achieves, other than frustrating them, you would be better off just not knowing it exists at all or else allow them to view it as normal, one of the two extremes, not a muddled compromise.

1 Like

I agree

System vendors can simply ask me that their systems (those not accepting subscribers) be displayed. There hasn’t yet been a case in which a vendor who has asked to be displayed has been denied.