I realized this a long time ago, and instead of talking, I just do it for several years now (although I must admit I found it funny that you mentioned how someone allegedly initiated it first). I track how active a user is in a discussion thread, the total number of posts, the number of positive feedback received, the preferred sections of the publication, how many merits a user receives in the context of 1 week, and I also know how many merits a week on average are received in each of the campaigns that I manage, and much more (thanks to Loyce, who has repeatedly changed the parameters of his software to suit my needs). I even mentioned some points so that those who submit applications have an understanding of what is expected of them.

I think, you made a good point that will take the forum to another next level next year. But there are some campaign managers that will not like to follow this system, because it will make them feel  as if they are bringing the high rank members down, you have said it before in this thread, that the way you view quality Posts, it may be different the way others managers view quality Posts and it will going to make some legendary or hero members to hate your decision, but to me is a good idea that will improve the forum which is what you stand, if all managers in the signature campaign can be honest in their selection like what other honest managers have be doing. Are you sure other signature campaign managers will agree to follow this system to select their participants in their various campaigns? I know that many managers have different ways of selecting their participants in their campaign to make their clients happy over the job done. Happy new year to all the managers in this forum.