Which of the following situations is NOT a violation of Article 1 by a licensee?

Stopping the marketing of a property after an offer has been accepted by the seller does not constitute a violation of Article 1. Article 1 generally focuses on the obligation to act in the best interest of clients, ensuring truthful representation, and providing necessary information. Once an offer is accepted, the primary role of the broker shifts to facilitating the transaction process rather than continuing to market the property, as it is now under contract pending any contingencies.

In this light, the other scenarios present clearer violations of the principles that Article 1 upholds. Refusing to disclose property information could mislead potential buyers and is contrary to the duty of transparency. Misrepresenting property features clearly contravenes the obligation to provide accurate information, directly impacting the buyer’s decision-making process. Encouraging multiple offers involves strategies that can still protect the seller's interests and ensure competitive bidding, but should always be done transparently to avoid implications of unethical practices. However, merely ceasing to market the property post-acceptance does not engage in any of these violations.