I hope you know and understand that each person involved in any related cases like this have different story entirely, Andreas story is not the same with that of Ross Ulbricht, so we may not fully aligned every inflow to be a donation, considering what he has been accused of doing before leading to his imprisonment, am not saying there are no more generous givers again in the world, but think of two things here, the amount sent and the source being anonymous.

maybe you should read this as well reply as well form bbc.reporter.

It's too big to be a coincidence, and I hope will unravel this story in full someday. Even though the chances of it are too, too small..

@coolcoinz. Agreed that someone wanted this donation to be visible, however, if this was really a donation for Ross, the donator would announce who he or she is and why the donation was made. Similar to other speculations, this transaction was made visible to make it appear to be a donation.

On someone owed him money. Who would have a debt of $30 million to Ross? Someone from the darknet? I reckon this person would want the transaction to be invisible or make it appear to be a donation heheheheh.

As long as we are still under the same administration that free him from jail, he cant be questioned again and i doubt anyone can probe him on any ground, what they needed to declare concerning it was what has been said already to be a free donation and that alone served a covering for him, but we all know that there is something big phishy about this transaction because its not ordinary and far beyond donation.

Because Ross Ulbricht had made a global attractive name on the bitcoin blockchain we now tend to take every moments of every incoming and outgoing of his wallet transactions for discussion? Why not anyone talking about Cryptohygenic holdings and transactions if it was necessary keeping the blockchain transactions on track as it has been with that of Ulbricht? Guess because I don't hold a huge amount of bitcoin like the whalers and I am not involved in any legal cases that was to drive your interests, right? Well, I think we should just let the man and not stressing on being detectives to his wallet because as long as his bitcoins is stored in the blockchain, we would never be able to detect who sent him and who he is sending the bitcoin to. Neither can we tell the ultimate reason for the transaction.

You're right, but here's a thought:
What if someone owed him money from silk road, or that person was his bank, contractor, whatever, held some BTC for Ross, and when the FBI got involved went underground?

That guy's address wasn't known, he remained anonymous for a decade, so money sent from that address would not compromise him. Imagine that you got Bitcoin from someone that mined it and used it to buy drugs from you. If you now use that btc to anonymously donate to someone, there's no way to tie your ID to it. I'm sure that if the coins can be traced the will eventually be, but what if they can't?

You might be correct, however, my argument is does anyone really believe that Ross did not keep some bitcoins as a type of emergency fund before he went to prison? He was making much profit from the Silk Road, it would be very headshaking to speculate that he did not have this.

However, if it is really a donation, okay it is a donation. But how can we confirm this? If it cannot be confirmed then these speculations will continue.

Really, that's true - and I hope this won't be found as something shady done on someone's side, we don't want another drama due to it.

Let it be I say

The surprising thing is that while he was in prison, no one gave him such a large donation (if anyone did before). Therefore, your version has a right to exist.

Satoshi... But by accident mistakenly wrote extra zeros.

Maybe then it was Trump who made this donation? Again, having made a mistake with extra zeros.

The amount is really impressive to just give away, even for such a legendary person.

Also, if there are no investigations on this matter from government agencies (normally, they should have questions about the origin of this transaction), then it becomes clear who the probable donor could be.

But in general, maybe it's enough to count other people's BTC? Better to be happy for the person whose life is gradually getting better. It seems to me that he deserves more than these 300BTC (at least he could have saved much more to this day).