By Xavier Mohr, SLReports.net

An Editorial

In a stunning nine-point post yesterday, L&L Bank and Trust (CapEx: LNL) CEO Lindsay Druart announced ambitious expansion plans that include the opening of a stock brokerage and global exchange at the bank's website, myllbt.com.

"The brokerage division is now L&L Bank and Trust Brokerage Exchange," said Druart. "Investors will openly trade LLBT’s portfolio on our enhanced website... this will be one stop shopping for all investment needs."

Druart says that companies not currently in the portfolio may be bid upon by investors through their enhanced trading system, at which point shares will be purchased by LNL from the applicable exchanges. Dividends will be paid to investor's accounts in the same way they would be at the respective exchanges.

An interesting twist to LNL's brokerage idea is a vague mention of "specifically-targeted funds and indices" that will be created to trade at the bank's website. An interesting note of this nature also appeared in an announcement from L&L Credit Reporting Agency and Business Services (CapEx: LCA).

By Samantha Goldflake and Guardian Market

The transcript of the 12/12/2007 meeting of the Second Life Exchange Commission (SLEC) is not very encouraging.  It shows an organization struggling with its own identity, leadership, and purpose in the virtual world, all the while public voices are growing increasingly critical of the abilities of the SLEC, as well as the conflicts of interest which reside with its leadership.  Two different schools of thought appear to be forming within the SLEC - one which looks at a system of punishment for companies and markets not compliant with the SLEC's regulation, the other which argues for rewarding the companies and markets which are compliant.

The first idea, that of punishment, is a natural one to strive for.  It is, after all, how governmental regulatory bodies operate.  If a company does not comply with their rules, they can fine, imprison, or seize assets as justified.  However, in Second Life this is simply impractical.  Although some systems have been constructed to incorporate this system of punishment into the mixture (such as ACE requiring that its companies who own land use BNT land, so that that asset may be seized if necessary), it simply does not carry the same weight that it does in First Life.  The bottom line is that even if you do everything you can to an avatar: take their money, land, inventory, maybe even ban them from Second Life - it simply does not carry as much weight as any one of those actions would in First Life.

 by Trichelle Rivera

Hello everyone, this article is actually quite personal. And I'm doing this to get the opinions of others on a matter that has evolved into a war between my former partner and I. Aside from being a freelance writer for SL Reports, I am also a shape-maker. For those that aren't familiar with what a shape-maker does-- I create shapes that provides avatars with a distinct look to compliment the skin of his/her choice. I haven't found a place yet to market and promote my shapes, but I'm in the process of doing so. Hopefully in a few weeks I'll accomplish that.

Well, to make a long story short, my partner and I broke up for numerous reasons. That aspect  I wish not to go into, as I respect his privacy and think that it would be unfair of me to do such a thing. However, when things suddenly turned for the worst, in a fit of rage and vindictiveness-- my ex requested that I no longer use the name (which I will not mention lol) to represent my business. As you can imagine, I was absolutely outraged. When we were together, he was fine with me using the name. I guess you can even say that our separate businesses became a union because of this. I became the Baby Phat to his Phat Farm,  for lack of a better example.