I hear a lot about what's good and bad for the sport, but very little about why it's good or bad. If you're going to make decisions and judgments about what's good for it then you need to be clear about what you're saying.
The first way that you do that is by establishing goals, things like higher ratings for Diamond League meets or higher ticket sales. From those goals, you can judge the positive and negative aspects of specific matters like PED use by measuring its effect on those goals. So if PED use lowers ratings for track meets then we can say that it hurts the sport. At the same time, if it raises ratings by causing phenomenal performances then we can say the effect is mixed and we can be clear and say exactly why. My hope is that "good for the sport" can move away from a catch-all term for something you think is good, and arguments can become more clear and detailed.
So what do you all think should be the goals and ideals against which we judge whether something is good or bad for running?