It's called the "greenhouse effect" because the CO2 traps heat in the earth's atmosphere, just like the walls and roof of a greenhouse trap the heat inside the greenhouse. Greenhouses are also enriched with extra CO2 to boost yields, but that's not why it's called the "greenhouse effect"
My point was that we refer to “greenhouse gasses” and “greenhouse effect” because these are associated with what happens in greenhouses because plants grow better in them.
Food for thought: you are basing your admittedly uneducated opinion of a legal matter on a single criteria.
If you end up being right, it will have been almost pure luck, but it may reinforce certain incorrect assumptions, like your theory that this single criteria was the deciding factor, or that this kind of armchair analysis is productive.
Point being: even if you are right, it's probably a bad idea to even take the position to begin with.
Acting on material, non-public information is considered insider trading by most definitions, no need to get lawyers involved.
However, whether these managers broke the law and if and how they should be punished is a legal question most people here should probably shut up about.
ON the Internet these days having an opinion that differs from that of the person you are commenting after is "having a melt down". It's a 14 year old's way of 'winning' the argument. It is also why reddit is dead to me now. Too many people can read words without understanding sentences.
reply