There’s no evidence that the firm has considered this, hence they’re in violation
There’s no evidence that the firm did not considered this, hence they’re in compliance. What an adorable firm
Mark as a supervisor is not in violation as his subordinates were acting in a discrete manner
Mark as a supervisor is in violation as he should have known what’s cooking between his subordinates. The firm should assign a pimp to coach Mark
Assumptions of exclusion, assumptions of inclusion, evidence of conducting, lack of evidence of conducting, no mention of lack of this,…
And what’s with talking about material nonpublic in bathrooms?
Mastering the material is of no value with such subjective twisted-perspective questions.
Educated guessing, will earn you zero, as the question is purposefully designed to deceive you.
Guessing, you’ll have a 33.33% of getting the correct answer
What a waste of studying times
For life, take this ethical lesson: don’t bribe, dong get bribed, don’t lie, don’t be a crook, don’t be an a$$. That’s it.