Lately I’ve been a bit annoyed by the blockchain “coincidental transfers”… Once people see Wallet A send money to Wallet B, they start imagining some behind-the-scenes cooperation. To put it simply, many things have an explainable path: the same source of funds gets distributed → it goes through an aggregator/router → it enters an exchange’s hot wallet → then it’s withdrawn to a bunch of new addresses, with cross-chain bridges and fund/address consolidation in between—so in the end, it looks like they “know each other.” Now I’ve gotten into the habit of drawing the path first and labeling the nodes clearly: the exchange/bridge/router/contract, and many “coincidences” collapse just like that. By the way, over on L2, people argue every day about TPS, fees, and subsidies, but the most honest thing on-chain is “how the money moves,” not what people say. I treat simplicity like a trap: a line like “transfer = related” really needs extra caution.