.COM Purists Got It Wrong
Let me first say that I am a .com advocate, enthusiast, and supporter of .com domains. Dotcom is an awesome brand unto itself.
Since the first release of non-com alternative domain name extensions (around 2002), a contingent of .commers began disseminating false information regarding the newer, alternative domain extensions (.biz, .us, .info). I knew that these were deliberate and unsubstantiated misrepresentations.
Having been heavily involved in a variety of both .com and alternative tld’s like .biz, .us, .info, .tv, .net, .tv, and .mobi, I knew that the misrepresentations against non-com domains were false. Ron Jackson of DNJournal.com just posted a link to an extremely revealing study completed by McAfee Software called “Mapping the Mal Web – The World’s Riskiest Domains“.
If we fast forward to the conclusion, it’s that .com ranked as the second riskiest domain worldwide for malware (viruses, phishing, email spam, etc.). McAfee’s study was scientific, and used large samples which ultimately support incontestable, statistically significant results.
This study sheds light on the truth, particularly in regard to the false statements made for years about all of the excellent alternative extensions. For example, .biz has grown steadily in adoption & use for years, and is currently the 10th most registered domain extension in the world (being the global internet portal for “business”). However, .COM purists have proclaimed for years that .biz was a haven for malware and scams. These comments were false, and were made out of fear & concern that .com might be compromised by newer tld’s.
Truth/Fact: The McAfee study concluded that .BIZ had only a 3.6% weighted “Risk ratio” for malware whereas .COM had a 32.2% weighted “Risk ratio”. This totally negates and reverses the claims by .COMMERS that other tld’s are used primarily for destructive or abusive purposes. The weighted “Risk ratio” for .US was only 3.1%, and for .INFO the “Risk ratio” was 15.8% (still much lower than .com).
So again, this is not about putting down .com. But it is about having a conversation based in reality. Dotcom is a great brand and a core foundation of the internet’s functionality. However, .com offers no more safety from malware and other abuses than do .INFO, .US, .BIZ or the other leading alternative tld’s.
The McAfee study is deep and very interesting. I recommend that domainers and other industry professionals read this important study and further their understanding of tld strengths and weaknesses. We need honest & accurate information about all tld’s in the domain name industry & marketplace. What we don’t need are cybersquatters, lies and false impressions presented as facts. That’s a disservice to everyone.
Moving forward in time, an investor forms his decisions within the context of history while also speculating on potential future developments. 
What we envisioned is coming to fruition, in that the world is embracing the internet in ways which naysayers could not imagine. I am an anti-naysayer, while also valuing pragmatism. Naysayers, as a glass half empty group, are only partially served by their cynicism and skeptical nature. Their excessive “that’ll never happen” attitude often keeps them on the sideline where speculative opportunities are missed.
