Hello, pls i want to know the criteria for C2 score. My system dove has a very low C2 score, why?
Regards
Tunde
[LINKSYSTEM_49141635]
Your C2 score is based on all your systems, not per each system. There is no C2 score for dove on its own; your other systems did not fare well so maybe that’s what has dragged down your C2 score.
This question comes up time and again and has been discussed at much length on the C2 forums. See for instance:
http://www.collective2.com/cgi-perl/board.mpl?want=listmsgs&threadhilite=8056&boardid=9323885&msghilite=49232637#threadnav
And/or, click on Search in the forum then type “C2 score” and select the ‘Find posts with all terms’ option and you will see many conversations on this topic. Also, click on the little question mark next to where the score is displayed for a short description.
Guys I don’t know if I should respond with “this really sucks” or thank you for supporting people who like to con others.
Fact of the matter is that if John Doe has 3 accounts under three names …ok so he might use a friends credit card…then he can show a higher score.
The guys who are honest enough to build a few systems that suck, get screwed.
Then there is the point of view that this is way for the C2 folks to try to pressure people into giving them money. For example right now my options only system has 5 sucky trades. I could have gotten out of the trades and built up a great track record by putting on some of my Babson trades, but thats cheating…if i had sent you some money you would have let me do this crap…but instead I am going back to the drawing board, like I mention in the notes about it.
Now if you show a score based upon the system itself and reveal how you get there …thats a different story.
Regards
Ron
Ron:
We base the C2 score on all systems that a vendor puts out to the public.Otherwise, vendors could (for example) start two systems: “Always Long” and “Always Short” … and could market the heck out of the system that, six months later, randomly happened to do well. By including both systems in the C2 score, we decrease the likelihood of system developers’ gaming the scoring methodology.
I understand your logic but I have looked at the performance of others that have 2 systems out of 10 that work. It appears that they worked their ass off in getting good systems. And finally have a few.
They could get a higher score by simply having a friend start up an account that uses the good system it would help their score.
And they can make bad systems look great and improving their score by just adding trades from a few developers that have systems that work.
Regards
Ron
Both of you have valid points. I don’t think it is possible to produce a single score that won’t sometimes be unfair in some way or another. Maybe it would be better to divide it into a “Vendor Score” and “System Score”?
Also how to prevent people from gaming the system by using false names etc.? I don’t know; seems like an impossible task unless you start asking people for ID when they register.
This thread from a few months ago talked a lot about the C2 score:
http://www.collective2.com/cgi-perl/board.mpl?want=listmsgs&threadhilite=7867&boardid=9323885&msghilite=47602753
Dean.
Regarding the money thing, it takes a helluvalotawork to develop and maintain a platform like C2 so they do have to make money from somewhere. One could argue that the 30% cut they take from vendors’ subscription charges should be enough. I don’t know; I have no idea how much revenue C2 actually generates in this way.
However, I also think it is good to charge vendors the semi-annual listing fee per system. Not that I like paying that (three times in my case) but I am sure that this goes at least part way towards efficiently separating the serious people from chancers.
Where I’d differ from the opinion above is when it comes to test systems. They should be free and their performance should not affect the C2 score as they are invisible to the public and cannot be made ‘live’ without wiping the slate clean. If someone wants to experiment, fair enough. Then if they think they’ve got a good system they wipe it clean, convert to ‘live’ and start building a real track record.
Dean,
I do not object to the 30% or the developer fees. The fees are not to crazy and gives C2 an incentive to be in biz. Heck for my course I charge 4K.
What I think c2 needs to do is upgrade the easy stuff that I have been asking for and modify some minor things. Heck I would like to be able to see my systems on the affiliate page. There are probably a few people like me that are software developers and business owners that can wind up being the best consultants that matt ever had…for free.
Several years ago the president of interactive data (esignal) put me and 50 other top trading software developers up in the ritz carlton for the weekend to get our input on his product line. We kept pounding on quality data …fix the bad ticks…and they go the message.
Years earlier, I built software that perplexed Phil Donhue…he put me on good morining America…national TV …the video link is at: http://www.jaenisch.com/ron.htm
What Matt needs to realize is that C2 will get competition big time down the road and unless he has a product that people swear by it will be much more difficult for him.
I would like to be able to tell folks that C2 works great.
Regards
Ron
Ron -
You are using an incorrect URL for your affiliate site. The Affiliate Setup page explains that the format of the correct URL is:
yourSubDomain.collective2.com
It is not www.yourSubDomain.collective2.com, nor is it yourSubDomain.www.collective2.com.
Matt
I am using the incorrect subdomain for the account because your software generates it. All i do is cut and paste.
Please fix.
Ron
Matt
I have no problem bringing up the page by cut and pasting
http://tradersalpha.com.autotradenow.com/
BUT …it does not show my systems.
I need it to show my systems.
Please fix
Ron[LINKSYSTEM_50288258]
You can’t use “.com” in the middle of your URL. You are allowed to choose a single subdomain. If you want to use “tradersalpha” then your URL will be:
tradersalpha.autotradenow.com
or
tradersalpha.collective2.com
Yes you are right…moving on…when I go to those two sites my systems…Babson and Forex only do not come up. Even if I use the find system feature
Please fix
Ron
You need to fix your "Site Subdomain" as configured on c2. Change it tom "tradesalpha.com" to just "tradersalpha"
Do this on the MY SITE option in the top menu bar, then select the "General" sub-tab.
Matt
Progress…
Change made and now if i request it the babson and forex only systems come up. http://tradersalpha.autotradenow.com/
Since I have my systems set up on the general page to come up I am surprised when they do not.
Please fix
Okay, we finally figured out the problem.
Your two systems which you selected to appear on your white label page did not meet the age criteria we usually set for new systems to appear on that page.
We have removed the age filter for white label sites where system developers select their own systems. This means your new systems will now appear on the page.
Thank you very much, Matt
As I look at the gains this week list i notice babson and forex only are not on the list. My math is pretty rusty but I think that at least one of them should be in the percentage range. Am I wrong??
Regards
Ron
What if i kill the remainng two system, will my C2 score for dove be corrected?
Although i have killed the two bad systems.
Tunde[LINKSYSTEM_49141635]
One of the main principles of C2 is that the histories of all systems that are or were live at some point are kept for all to see. I think this is actually a very important function of C2.
I don’t know exactly how the C2 score is calculated but I doubt very much that killing a system will immediately alter the score. However, I would expect the effect of killed systems on the score to diminish with time so that in, say, six months (or whatever) the score calculation will become dominated by your remaining live systems.
Ok thanks Dean, I’ll see the outcome next few weeks.
Regards[LINKSYSTEM_49141635]
