When a system developer “kills” a system, it would seem appropriate for all of that system’s open positions to be automatically closed. Otherwise, persons contemplating subscription to another of that developer’s systems may be unduly swayed by the subsequent “performance” (good or bad) of the “killed” system, which is in fact no longer being maintained by the developer.
I agree. I can’t understand why C2 doesn’t close all open positions when a system is killed.
I can’t understand why a vendor wouldn’t close all his own open positions and cancel all his own open orders before he kills his system. Why is that C2’s problem?
"I can’t understand why C2 doesn’t close all open positions when a system is killed."
I noticed that “dead” systems (systems killed by their own system developer) are still seemingly active, even if the last open position was closed years ago.
And as far as C2 is concerned, that’s a lot of wasted processing power considering all the dead systems floating around, wouldn’t you agree Matthew?
