Why did this transaction confirm?

[Peter R]

It looks like https://blockchain.info/tx/ee61b911610f66f539832699fbbf4ab3955c8bd5ad0cfa570ff500dedcde5bf8 is just one of many spam transactions that have been mined recently.

Yep.  I noticed this one last week:

https://blockchain.info/tx/cff61bad78a1759cf71cf287d67f3a6d63f9f9c2f0566735c06446455834b231

Interesting.  That one was sent from "SPAM SEND" (1DkRWKXpfQwm5b1pGL2QdpPdrUdKSdzbnG) and mined by Discuss Fish.  I checked the two blocks mined recently by BCPool (blocks 309740 and 309657) and indeed they mined another 120 satoshi spam outputs from "SPAM SEND" in addition to the 17,976 from 1Enjoy that I reported earlier.  

What's interesting is that BCPool also includes some transactions that consolidated a bunch of dust too:

https://blockchain.info/address/1MQQAxLKLKt3RznFMLmxXMieEuCqKXbMoe

So, who is BCPool?

[DeathAndTaxes]

The coinbase txn decoded contains bcpoool.io

https://bcpool.io/

[Peter R]

The coinbase txn decoded contains bcpoool.io

https://bcpool.io/

Yes, but there seems to be no information about bcpool.io.  Their "about" page:

https://bcpool.io/index.php?page=about&action=pool

Is also exactly the same this "about" page:

https://chunkypools.com/aur/index.php?page=about&action=pool

And doesn't contain any information about them at all.

[amaclin]

Hmm. I also see some strange things that have never seen before.
Lets take transaction https://blockchain.info/tx/4af1a19fd6940758e2c4a3e779cb25023d93668c75a313f93e8008c0b075488e
it was created ant sent a ~week ago with 0 fees and very-very low priority (date on bc.i is incorrect - tx is older)
No miner wanted to include this transaction into a block.
There was no reason to include this transaction
Yesterday somebody re-broadcasted it (bc.i forgot the first copy) again

Yesterday I redeemed it with
https://blockchain.info/tx/8a1f0f07fb397b2aa0e77995723f2dac9aee7df63a6f05a7db7d168d62a60f94
with a fee of 0.0001

So, there is a reason now for a miner to include both transactions - miner gains 0.0001 (which is more than default 0.00001 per kb)

And these two transactions were mined! Of course, in same block (309837) because miner would not include first transaction without second.
----
Update 1: No. Block 309837 contains a lot of free transactions.
----
Update 2: child-pays-for-parent?

[RedDiamond]

Hmm. I also see some strange things that have never seen before.
Lets take transaction https://blockchain.info/tx/4af1a19fd6940758e2c4a3e779cb25023d93668c75a313f93e8008c0b075488e

Some of the addresses in transaction are also quite interesting: 1P1ease..., 1Give..., 1hint...

[amaclin]

Some of the addresses in transaction are also quite interesting: 1P1ease..., 1Give..., 1hint...

Nothing interesting. You have missed topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=661781.0 (I do not remember the exact page)
The transaction with vanity addresses was used as a "public message".

[RedDiamond]

Some of the addresses in transaction are also quite interesting: 1P1ease..., 1Give..., 1hint...

Nothing interesting. You have missed topic https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=661781.0 (I do not remember the exact page)
The transaction with vanity addresses was used as a "public message".

Yes, missed totally  . Thank you for the link, looks that the puzzle was great fun.

[runeks]

FWIW, one of the outputs in f75b455b4df94bcdcd54985b4aeea9948d2a1dca0f63c65b85ad2d941050c5cf sends 1 Satoshi to an address I own, that has been used as a change address in a previous transaction. So it looks like the outputs aren't random, or at least not all of them. Someone has scanned the blockchain are they are sending outputs to existing addresses.

I discovered this thread because I noticed someone had sent 1 Satoshi to me on July 8, and the transaction ID led me to this thread.