<p><a href="https://blockchain.info/address/1F89hmmrtonJfAQNAqDmeDadcw7AsZcvXG" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://blockchain.info/address/1F89hmmrtonJfAQNAqDmeDadcw7AsZcvXG</a></p>

<p>The "Unable to decode output address" are as Nate commented OP_RETURN scripts whose purpose is to insert a short message or data snippet into the block chain. They are not so bizarre</p>

<p>Looking at some of the timestamps on the smaller transactions they are not all sent at the same time and fairly spaced out like someone might be manually making the transactions as opposed to a script running.  Each transaction is approx 30 USD so maybe not so unusual?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-04-29T11:16:05.530Z
2018-04-29T11:16:05.530Z
Fuzzybear
<p>Why would anyone spend $65 in fees to send 500+ outputs for .001BTC to the same address?<a href="https://blockchain.info/tx/0270a4af1269b52bf242390076faa460cfcffe2db74bc748163d8de94e9ce875" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://blockchain.info/tx/0270a4af1269b52bf242390076faa460cfcffe2db74bc748163d8de94e9ce875</a>
then clicking through to the input address, it has some really bizarre transactions. Tons of transactions that have undecodeable outputs, and also, blockchain.info shows that only .003 btc was transacted for many of them, when clearly more was transacted. Indeed, clicking through to the transaction itself shows the correct amount. What is going on here??
<a href="https://blockchain.info/address/1F89hmmrtonJfAQNAqDmeDadcw7AsZcvXG" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://blockchain.info/address/1F89hmmrtonJfAQNAqDmeDadcw7AsZcvXG</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-11T23:11:32.183Z
The undecodable outputs appear to be OP_RETURN scripts whose purpose is to insert a short message or data snippet into the block chain.  They are not so bizarre.
Nate Eldredge
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-11T23:13:23.693Z
The "amount transacted" is based on blockchain.info's guess that some of the outputs are "change" that's being paid back to the sender.  So only the part that doesn't appear to be "change" is reported as "amount transacted".  It's based on heuristics and can be mistaken or tricked.
Nate Eldredge
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-12T13:23:51.297Z
so what about the .001BTC? are all 500 of those to encode data? If so, where is this data?
Is there a chance this is an attack to fill up the mempool?
hedgedandlevered
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-05-12T14:54:52.997Z
That I do not know.
Nate Eldredge
<transactions><transaction-fees>
bizarre transactions involving one address
hedgedandlevered
# bizarre transactions involving one address

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-05-11)

Why would anyone spend $65 in fees to send 500+ outputs for .001BTC to the same address?<https://blockchain.info/tx/0270a4af1269b52bf242390076faa460cfcffe2db74bc748163d8de94e9ce875>
then clicking through to the input address, it has some really bizarre transactions. Tons of transactions that have undecodeable outputs, and also, blockchain.info shows that only .003 btc was transacted for many of them, when clearly more was transacted. Indeed, clicking through to the transaction itself shows the correct amount. What is going on here??
<https://blockchain.info/address/1F89hmmrtonJfAQNAqDmeDadcw7AsZcvXG>

**Tags:** transactions, transaction-fees

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The undecodable outputs appear to be OP_RETURN scripts whose purpose is to insert a short message or data snippet into the block chain.  They are not so bizarre.  
> **username_1**: The "amount transacted" is based on blockchain.info's guess that some of the outputs are "change" that's being paid back to the sender.  So only the part that doesn't appear to be "change" is reported as "amount transacted".  It's based on heuristics and can be mistaken or tricked.  
> **username_0**: so what about the .001BTC? are all 500 of those to encode data? If so, where is this data? Is there a chance this is an attack to fill up the mempool?  
> **username_1**: That I do not know.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2018-04-29. Score: 1

<https://blockchain.info/address/1F89hmmrtonJfAQNAqDmeDadcw7AsZcvXG>

The "Unable to decode output address" are as username_1 commented OP\_RETURN scripts whose purpose is to insert a short message or data snippet into the block chain. They are not so bizarre

Looking at some of the timestamps on the smaller transactions they are not all sent at the same time and fairly spaced out like someone might be manually making the transactions as opposed to a script running. Each transaction is approx 30 USD so maybe not so unusual?


---

