BestChange, for example, implements a rule that only 2-3 posts made on threads beyond 5 pages are to be counted. This is because mega threads are usually full of spam and posts beyond the 5th page are more easily missed than those made in the first 2 pages. Also, posts that are already buried deep in mega threads are normally less interesting because they are most probably just repetition of earlier posts, and posters probably didn't even read everything before joining the discussion.
Personally, I feel that this is a horrible rule and creates a ton of spam as well. I have over 6000 posts and I don't think more than 5% of them is written in threads that have less than 5 pages.
These threads are usually the 'most worthless' on my list when evaluating who writes where and what.
Forcing someone to open a 'how was your day in crypto today' spamthread because a post in Premier league thread is considered as spam is, well, not the best move you can make as a campaign manager.
I think this was misinterpreted. BestChange preferably counts posts in the first two or even three pages of such questionable "spammy" threads. Some threads have a mature discussion even after 15 pages and I didn't notice that they BestChange don't count constructive posts in such a discussion. It is also understandable, they are a universal service and want to be visible everywhere on the forum, not only in priority gambling, for example.
And honestly, I'm not sure how much gambling mega threads contribute to signature promotion, because none or just a few people go back to the previous page to read something. Only the Stake campaign makes sense there, where such threads are crowded with their signatures.
Quote
I have over 6000 posts and I don't think more than 5% of them is written in threads that have less than 5 pages.
Yes, it can be said that you don't write much in all parts of the forum 6217 in only 365 topics
