"I can assure you that I am not singling out Tim MacMahon," Cuban wrote in an e-mail response to a reporter's questions. Cuban said he never read MacMahon's posts and had no idea MacMahon had been blogging so long. He said someone did bring the Johnson item to his attention, along with the fact that MacMahon was a blogger.I'm not going to call you a word that ends with pants-on-fire, but for reals? You've never ventured to the DMN's Mavericks' blog? Seriously? Bobs Mong and Decherd, you either need to do better marketing, or Cubes, you lack awareness. I'm doubting either is the case. I have a hard time choking down a scenario that has you not looking at the DMN's coverage of a team you own. I have a hard time choking down that you never got a blip on your RSS feed that featured a Tim MacMahon blog post, considering you have even said you use - nay, rely on an RSS feed for reading material:
"Between Google for News, video and web, Live.com for images, Icerocket.com for blog and RSS and Amazon for books, its pretty easy to find everything and anything from anywhere." -- Mark Cuban, blogmaverick.com, March 10, 1:32 p.m.According to the Dallas Morning News:
The Mavericks' new policy denies locker room access to writers whose "primary purpose is to blog." The policy states that the team does "not have enough room in the locker room, nor enough media passes to fairly accommodate everyone."Well, the solution seems easy enough. If the blogger in question is also attached to a paper product or a broadcast, he is not just a blogger. He's a contributor to the newspaper, magazine or sports broadcast. When Sports Illustrated or ESPN - who have a veritable stable of bloggers whose work never sees the print or video product - come calling, are you booting them, too? Don't be a tool, Cubes. There's a way to keep out the riffraff without looking like you're just giving a writer the boot because you didn't like what he wrote. This policy looks knee-jerk, and makes you look like, well, a jerk.