These transactions dried up in due course of time, or at least various of the here presented. Whether or not this was a result of alarm bell, mechanism upgrade or migration, oversight and/or regulations, higher authority, it remains a mystery to the public. However, one aspect of the above mechanism cannot be highlighted enough, therefore *kick*: If actual trades are involved, it would be a false increased (perception) of trading volume. This of course happens with as good as every asset, but it may be difficult to point out the involved bots/parties/spheres due to the obfuscation of what/who is what/who that is inherent to all assets. For if this mechanism is a 'natural' one, then why has it not been properly investigated and documented by involved parties (trading markets). The same would apply for it being an 'anomaly'. This topic -with nobody answering to this day- might require further digging, to make sure that fair dealings are not compromised. One might suggest that the transactions are to maintain the balance/liquidity of involved markets, as if mechanism was 'authorized', but if indeed so then the transactions would likely be composed differently and there would be documentation of the procedure(s), validation guidelines, et cetera, which would simply explain all this.
These transactions dried up in due course of time, or at least various of the here presented. Whether or not this was a result of alarm bell, mechanism upgrade or migration, oversight and/or regulations, higher authority, it remains a mystery to the public. However, one aspect of the above mechanism cannot be highlighted enough, therefore *kick*: If actual trades are involved, it would be a false increased (perception) of trading volume. This of course happens with as good as every asset, but it may be difficult to point out the involved bots/parties/spheres due to the obfuscation of what/who is what/who that is inherent to all assets. For if this mechanism is a 'natural' one, then why has it not been properly investigated and documented by involved parties (trading markets). The same would apply for it being an 'anomaly'. This topic -with nobody answering to this day- might require further digging, to make sure that fair dealings are not compromised. One might suggest that the transactions are to maintain the balance/liquidity of involved markets, as if mechanism was 'authorized', but if indeed so then the transactions would likely be composed differently and there would be documentation of the procedure(s), validation guidelines, et cetera, which would simply explain all this.

These transactions dried up in due course of time, or at least various of the here presented. Whether or not this was a result of alarm bell, mechanism upgrade or migration, oversight and/or regulations, higher authority, it remains a mystery to the public. However, one aspect of the above mechanism cannot be highlighted enough, therefore *kick*: If actual trades are involved, it would be a false increased (perception) of trading volume. This of course happens with as good as every asset, but it may be difficult to point out the involved bots/parties/spheres due to the obfuscation of what/who is what/who that is inherent to all assets. For if this mechanism is a 'natural' one, then why has it not been properly investigated and documented by involved parties (trading markets). The same would apply for it being an 'anomaly'. This topic -with nobody answering to this day- might require further digging, to make sure that fair dealings are not compromised. One might suggest that the transactions are to maintain the balance/liquidity of involved markets, as if mechanism was 'authorized', but if indeed so then the transactions would likely be composed differently and there would be documentation of the procedure(s), validation guidelines, et cetera, which would simply explain all this.

These transactions dried up in due course of time, or at least various of the here presented. Whether or not this was a result of alarm bell, mechanism upgrade or migration, oversight and/or regulations, higher authority, it remains a mystery to the public. However, one aspect of the above mechanism cannot be highlighted enough, therefore *kick*: If actual trades are involved, it would be a false increased (perception) of trading volume. This of course happens with as good as every asset, but it may be difficult to point out the involved bots/parties/spheres due to the obfuscation of what/who is what/who that is inherent to all assets. For if this mechanism is a 'natural' one, then why has it not been properly investigated and documented by involved parties (trading markets). The same would apply for it being an 'anomaly'. This topic -with nobody answering to this day- might require further digging, to make sure that fair dealings are not compromised. One might suggest that the transactions are to maintain the balance/liquidity of involved markets, as if mechanism was 'authorized', but if indeed so then the transactions would likely be composed differently and there would be documentation of the procedure(s), validation guidelines, et cetera, which would simply explain all this.