Bitget follows legal steps after USD 20 million Voxel futures manipulation scandal

• Bitget sued eight accounts for voxel manipulation and promising compensation for affected users.
• The market for the market for the market for 200% for the price of 200%; The complete incident report soon expects.

The Crypto Exchange Bitget applies legal steps against eight reports that are accused of manipulated the Voxel token. This incident triggered a sharp price tip and over 20 million US dollars of improper profits.

Bitget has undertaken to return all users affected by the volatility to users in order to restore the trust according to the suspicious trade activity.

Legal measures and user protection

Jiayin Xie, Bitget's Head of Asia, confirmed on April 27 that the alleged accounts were issued for legal communications.

Bitget announced that users who acted Voxel during the 30-minute disorder on April 20 (16: 00–16: 30 UTC) did not be punished and then withdrawn funds, although some users were originally influenced by frozen assets.

The exchange has restored the accounts concerned and assured users that they will not take any further punitive measures against them.

Bitget: What happened during the Voxelspike

The manipulation occurred quickly, with Voxel rose over 200% within just 30 minutes and briefly became the most traded asset of the bit. The price rose from $ 0.125 to $ 0.1645, which was driven by business that were avoided the regular order book.

Bitget has attributed the spike to a suspected mistake in its market -sensitive bot. This bot meant that orders were carried out unusually quickly and an opportunity for manipulation were created.

In response to this, the trade was interrupted, several accounts were frozen and Bitget announced plans to regain affected business.

This incident raises questions about transparency, shows potential counter -reactions and underlines significant effects on the industry.

Transparency, setbacks and industry effects

Bitget claims that the problem is neither the result of an internal error nor an external hack. However, the exchange has not yet disclosed the identity of those involved, although a complete incident report will soon be expected.

In the meantime, Bitget faces growing counter -reactions. Critics emphasized earlier comments by CEO Gracy Chen, who had criticized Hyperliquid's dealings with a similar incident with the Jelly token.

With the examination of the bitget, the situation has now re -investigated the reliability of the reliability of crypto exchange and the risks of automated trading systems.