Currently, if there is a forum that doesn't increment a member's post count, it will still be inculded on the "Most active in" field in the member's profile (if it's their most active forum , obviouslly). I don't really think this should be the case because it misleads users into thinking that thoses posts have actually contributed to the user's overall post count, which isn't the case.

Feedback?

I would consider it a bug if your way was implemented. If it was your way it would misleed people into thinking they're completly inactive in the form they are most active in.

See, to me, if that's the forum they are most active in, should it not be reported that way - regardless of their logged post count?

Yeah it's activity not post count.

This sounds absurd to me. If I am most active in some forum, how can you mislead me into thinking I'm completely inactive there?

But anyway, I understand the reasoning for the both point of views. It seemed a bit odd to me at first too, when I saw it. I haven't examined it lately so I'm not sure how those statistic numbers are calculated (like how many posts, what part of posts, what part of total board posts the member have and such), but it's possible that the wording might not be precise enough there somewhere. (But maybe it is, I really haven't examined.)

Still, regarding the "Most active in" part, IMO it really should show the forum not taking into consideration specific forum post count increment settings. Even if a "Most counted posts in" (or someting like that) would be added, I'm not sure it's very easy to implement with all the post deletions and post recounts etc. I guess it would require another column in the members table. (Simply skipping all the "non-incrementing" forums when searching for the "Most counted posts in" would probably also be acceptable, only the admin would have to recount the posts when a forum's "posts increment" option is switched.)