WAG Does your gymnast take any vitamins/ suppliments?

Parents... Coaches... Judges... Gymnasts...
DON'T LURK... Join The Discussion!

Members See FEWER Ads!
Join for FREE!
Not open for further replies.
Juice Plus all the way! My daughter was always missing school for being sick before I started her on it, now the only time she misses is for meets. She gets mad "it's not fair, all my friends get sick, why can't I".
She threatens to quit taking her Juice Plus, which is just fruits and veggies in a capsule and I tell her how many veggies she's going to have to eat, she begrudgingly takes her pills...lol
This thread is from 2014, If you want to restart the conversation please start another thread.
I really don't agree with this blanket rule when it is applied to relevant threads such as this. Yes, it is an old thread, but it is a nice topic that really doesn't have a "shelf life," so to speak. The title of the thread is a question, and whether a poster's answer was right when the thread was started, or years later, it is still very relevant and it should be fine to expand upon.
I am not a mod, and I do not make the rules. I do want to voice my opinion though, and I have to say that this rule bothers me more often than not. If this rule is being applied to a thread that was very specific to the time it was created, then I am all for the rule. However, most of the time it is in response to people posting their answers on still-relevant threads. I totally understand the need for this rule, but it should not be a blanket rule on every old thread. I think by keeping threads like this open, it reduces clutter on similar subject matter.

As a very active and devoted member of this board, I wanted to share my views on this rule.
I agree with Aero. Often the first thing I do when I have a question is to search old threads. It would be great to continue the discussions which were started there instead of starting over. Sometimes new threads are started and people answer by referring to old threads- seems it could be helpful to just pick them up, dust them off, and continue where they left off.
I would like to agree with Aero. I don't believe I was even a member when this thread originated, and I found it very interesting because I have started my kid on probiotics and calcium...she seems to really benefit from them. So I say there are times a thread can be resurrected and be beneficial. Now when it is someone asking about how someone's kid is doing, and the person in question hasn't posted in two years? Well...that's a different story. But overall, I say let the threads resurrect and rejuvenate. Rah!
  • Like
Reactions: Aero
It then becomes impossible to decide which to revive and which not. Slippery slope and makes a mods job, for which they are not paid harder.

Things change, "old" Level threads are not the same as "new" Level threads. So all Level 4 threads are not the same.

If it's important it gets pinned.

Then people have to read through pages of things they don't necessarily want to or need to. Because threads wander, like this one which has turned into a meta discussion.

And finally many threads need to die a natural death and should stay dead.

Do a search, copy and paste and link. But let the old thread stay dead.

In other words leave it alone.
i've always wondered if this rule has anything to do with getting paid for advertisements or something? perhaps there are website stats that make it beneficial to have more new threads or something?
Well it is the rule. We usually encourage starting a new thread and linking to the old one for reference.

The rule came about because of so many threads being dragged up when the original contributors were no longer even members.

There is no financial benefit for the CB either way. Just less hassle with old threads.
Not open for further replies.