most probable explanation: a coordinated chinese attack to trigger stop-loss-margin-calls.
I agree with you about goal to trigger some stop-loss margin calls, but such dumping does not need to be characterized as either an "attack" nor "chinese."
You do see the timing right? ... And that
the chinese started this... and the rest followed... right?? Or are you so trapped in your bubble and blinded by the soap distortions on your bubble's walls... ??
Whatever, savetherain.
I think that I sufficiently made my point already, but maybe a bit of a further explanation could be helpful - rather than sitting back without acknowledging your seemingly attempts to buy into superficiality while denigrating the comments of others.
Yes, some kind of pump or dump can start in one location, such as china, but the bitcoin is much more complex than being controlled by a narrow set of interests and market movements play on each other, even if they may have started in one location. There exists all kinds of lead and follow from various trading points, and to characterize the matter as "chinese" or an "attack" seems to largely lose the point with attempts at superficiality and misleading attempts at oversimplification.
Also, the "attack" characterization seems to imply that there is something going on that is beyond mere market dynamics. In fact, most exchanges have been experiencing fairly low levels of trade volume, which leaves pumping and dumping (in either direction) fairly easy to carry out with a relatively low number of coins... Characterizing such trading as an "attack" comes off as an exaggeration in the least, and could be characterized as misleading if such language were coming from a troll - which I would not want to suggest that IMI is a troll, though you, savetherain, frequently do come off as a bit of a troll.... but that may be just your strange ways of presentation?