Audit log

Every state-changing event for Polkadot: moderation decisions on community submissions, plus corrections and updates from the news pipeline. URL-based decisions carry three independent witnesses — the original source, an Internet Archive snapshot taken at submission time, and a Solana memo signed by our publicly-disclosed publisher key.

1. #1reviewby reviewerreviewer

   2026-05-13 16:34:01Z
   Score: 58 → 58 (no score change)
   The Polkadot investigation page is substantively accurate on its major claims — the Hyperbridge exploit, Parity wallet freeze, treasury spending figures, leadership changes, Q1 2025 metrics, the DOT supply cap, and regulatory status are all confirmable from independent sources. The most significant factual error is the assertion that Gavin Wood 'cycled out and back as Parity CEO twice,' when evidence supports only one such cycle. The 'Polkadot Fund' scam citation is also incorrect — the cited Medium article does not support that specific claim; the claim's only source is an unverified community forum post. Several claims use a July 2024 2-year depletion projection without noting that subsequent tokenomics changes have materially extended the treasury runway.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 419,507,195

   sig

   3uesdizCqFk8…KvcPhaCjcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   5PoDgdXBJHHr…BN9XsFqUcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1112 B) ▸

   {"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-05-13T16:34:01.242Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","new_score":58,"page_slug":"polkadot","prev_score":58,"reason":"The Polkadot investigation page is substantively accurate on its major claims — the Hyperbridge exploit, Parity wallet freeze, treasury spending figures, leadership changes, Q1 2025 metrics, the DOT supply cap, and regulatory status are all confirmable from independent sources. The most significant factual error is the assertion that Gavin Wood 'cycled out and back as Parity CEO twice,' when evidence supports only one such cycle. The 'Polkadot Fund' scam citation is also incorrect — the cited Medium article does not support that specific claim; the claim's only source is an unverified community forum post. Several claims use a July 2024 2-year depletion projection without noting that subsequent tokenomics changes have materially extended the treasury runway.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":1,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision 894bb8da-573d-43a9-933d-94be619f543dcopy
2. #2review reviseby judgejudge

   2026-05-13 16:34:01Z
   Score: 58 → 48 (-10)
   The reviewer found 1 disputed claim and 3 unverifiable claims out of 28 total, placing the disputed rate at 14% — within the minor-issues band. The disputed claim (claim_findings[17]: Gavin Wood 'cycled out and back as Parity CEO twice') is directly contradicted by two Tier 1 sources establishing only one documented leadership cycle. Additionally, claim_findings[21] (the 7 million DOT 'Polkadot Fund' scam) contains a citation error: the cited Medium article does not mention the incident at all, leaving it supported only by an unverified community forum post. The treasury 2-year depletion projection (claim_findings[9]) is presented without noting that subsequent March 2026 tokenomics changes have materially extended the runway, which may mislead readers about the current risk level. All major factual claims — the Hyperbridge exploit, Parity wallet freeze, treasury spend figures, Q1 2025 metrics, supply cap, and leadership tenure — are confirmed by independent Tier 1 sources. Revision is warranted to correct the Parity CEO cycle count, fix or remove the unsupported 7M DOT scam citation, and add temporal context to the depletion projection.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 419,507,214

   sig

   3EeDvL7CgyxG…3m95KrACcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   7ZjgFjfou2ND…pn2nvWrUcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1505 B) ▸

   {"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-05-13T16:34:01.242Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","new_score":48,"page_slug":"polkadot","prev_score":58,"reason":"The reviewer found 1 disputed claim and 3 unverifiable claims out of 28 total, placing the disputed rate at 14% — within the minor-issues band. The disputed claim (claim_findings[17]: Gavin Wood 'cycled out and back as Parity CEO twice') is directly contradicted by two Tier 1 sources establishing only one documented leadership cycle. Additionally, claim_findings[21] (the 7 million DOT 'Polkadot Fund' scam) contains a citation error: the cited Medium article does not mention the incident at all, leaving it supported only by an unverified community forum post. The treasury 2-year depletion projection (claim_findings[9]) is presented without noting that subsequent March 2026 tokenomics changes have materially extended the runway, which may mislead readers about the current risk level. All major factual claims — the Hyperbridge exploit, Parity wallet freeze, treasury spend figures, Q1 2025 metrics, supply cap, and leadership tenure — are confirmed by independent Tier 1 sources. Revision is warranted to correct the Parity CEO cycle count, fix or remove the unsupported 7M DOT scam citation, and add temporal context to the depletion projection.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision e72cc60f-2f81-4be4-bce4-6cf6581e0bb6copy
3. #3publishby system:backfill

   2026-05-14 06:02:36Z
   Score: ? → ? (no score change)
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 419,628,933

   sig

   5FDXjSFLrr1V…s9kc9TPRcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   9PfF1mr7mY9v…uGv4W7Uacopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (8670 B) ▸

   {"actor":"system:backfill","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","kind":"publish","page_slug":"polkadot","published_at":"2026-05-14T06:02:36.459Z","sequence_num":3,"snapshot":{"content_type":"investigation","entity_name":"Polkadot","sections":[{"content":"A forged cross-chain message bypassed proof validation on Hyperbridge's Ethereum gateway contract, allowing minting of approximately 1 billion fake bridged DOT tokens. Losses were revised to ~$2.5M (10x the initial estimate). Native DOT on the Polkadot relay chain was unaffected.","heading":"Hyperbridge Bridge Exploit (April 2026)","severity":"critical","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: Attacker Mints $1B Polkadot Tokens","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/04/13/attacker-mints-usd1-billion-polkadot-tokens-on-ethereum-ends-up-stealing-just-usd250-000"},{"credibility":2,"name":"Yahoo Finance: Hyperbridge Exploit 10x Worse","type":"news_article","url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/hyperbridge-confirms-bridged-polkadot-exploit-053634639.html"},{"credibility":2,"name":"The Defiant: Polkadot Hyperbridge Exploit","type":"news_article","url":"https://thedefiant.io/news/hacks/polkadot-hyperbridge-ethereum-gateway-exploit-sjb0ql"}]},{"content":"Parity Technologies' own multisig wallet bug permanently froze approximately $98M of Polkadot's just-raised ICO proceeds in November 2017. The frozen ETH was never recovered, forcing a second fundraise in 2019. EIP-999 to recover the funds was rejected by the Ethereum community.","heading":"2017 Parity Wallet Freeze","severity":"high","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: ICO Funds Frozen in Parity Wallets","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/11/09/ico-funds-among-millions-frozen-in-parity-wallets"},{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: Parity Postmortem","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/11/15/parity-team-publishes-postmortem-on-160-million-ether-freeze"}]},{"content":"$133M spent in one year including alleged $180K on private-jet branding. Treasury projected to deplete within 2 years at the 2024 spending rate. W3F CEO stepped down in February 2025. Grants program, Decentralized Voices initiative, and community support channels were all shut down.","heading":"Treasury Overspending Crisis","severity":"high","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: Polkadot Treasury 2-Year Depletion","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/business/2024/07/02/polkadots-245m-treasury-will-last-2-years-at-current-spending-rate"},{"credibility":2,"name":"The Defiant: Community Unhappy with Treasury Spend","type":"news_article","url":"https://thedefiant.io/news/nfts-and-web3/polkadot-community-unhappy-with-heavy-treasury-spend"}]},{"content":"Q1 2025 transactions down 36.9% QoQ; monthly active addresses fell 13.1%; daily active users approximately 5,000; TVL at ~1.8% of total DeFi (from 3.5% in 2021). Of 200+ registered parachains, only approximately 30 remain active.","heading":"Ecosystem Decline","severity":"high","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"Messari: State of Polkadot Q1 2025","type":"research","url":"https://messari.io/report/state-of-polkadot-q1-2025"},{"credibility":2,"name":"The Defiant: Polkadot Is Kind of Done","type":"news_article","url":"https://thedefiant.io/news/blockchains/polkadot-ecosystem-update-may-2026"}]},{"content":"Gavin Wood cycled out and back as Parity CEO twice. W3F CEO tenure was 16 months. Bloomberg reported a 30% workforce layoff at Parity in October 2023.","heading":"Leadership Instability","severity":"medium","sources":[{"credibility":1,"name":"Bloomberg: Parity to Cut 30% of Staff","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-23/polkadot-blockchain-developer-parity-to-eliminate-about-30-of-staff"}]},{"content":"14,000+ fraudulent sites have been catalogued by Polkadot's anti-scam team. An alleged 'Polkadot Fund' scam reportedly took over 7 million DOT from Chinese community users.","heading":"Third-Party Scams","severity":"medium","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"Polkadot Anti-Scam Initiatives","type":"official","url":"https://medium.com/polkadot-network/polkadots-anti-scam-initiatives-1660ef5787b7"}]},{"content":"No SEC enforcement action against Polkadot. ETF applications from Grayscale and 21Shares are under review. DOT was not named in the SEC's Coinbase lawsuit.","heading":"Regulatory Status","severity":"low","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"SEC Opens Proceedings on Grayscale Polkadot ETF","type":"news_article","url":"https://charltonsquantum.com/us-sec-opens-proceedings-on-grayscale-polkadot-trust-etf-listing/"}]},{"content":"Next-generation compute architecture (JAM) is in development with 43 competing implementations. Mainnet targeted for late 2026-2027. A hard DOT supply cap of 2.1 billion was enacted in March 2026.","heading":"JAM Upgrade","severity":"low","sources":[{"credibility":2,"name":"Polkadot Roundup 2025","type":"official","url":"https://medium.com/polkadot-network/polkadot-roundup-2025-3c3c71c7e9c4"}]}],"sources_used":[{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: Treasury Depletion","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/business/2024/07/02/polkadots-245m-treasury-will-last-2-years-at-current-spending-rate"},{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: Hyperbridge Exploit","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/04/13/attacker-mints-usd1-billion-polkadot-tokens-on-ethereum-ends-up-stealing-just-usd250-000"},{"credibility":1,"name":"Bloomberg: Parity Layoffs","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-23/polkadot-blockchain-developer-parity-to-eliminate-about-30-of-staff"},{"credibility":2,"name":"CoinDesk: Parity Wallet Freeze","type":"news_article","url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/11/09/ico-funds-among-millions-frozen-in-parity-wallets"},{"credibility":2,"name":"Messari: State of Polkadot Q1 2025","type":"research","url":"https://messari.io/report/state-of-polkadot-q1-2025"},{"credibility":2,"name":"The Defiant: Polkadot Is Done","type":"news_article","url":"https://thedefiant.io/news/blockchains/polkadot-ecosystem-update-may-2026"},{"credibility":2,"name":"Yahoo Finance: Hyperbridge 10x Worse","type":"news_article","url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/crypto/articles/hyperbridge-confirms-bridged-polkadot-exploit-053634639.html"}],"summary":"Polkadot (DOT) is a multi-chain protocol founded by Gavin Wood, ranked #41 by market cap (~$2.3B). The project faces significant headwinds: a $133M treasury overspending crisis (projected 2-year depletion), the 2017 Parity wallet freeze that locked ~$98M of ICO proceeds, an April 2026 Hyperbridge exploit minting $1B in fake bridged DOT (losses ~$2.5M), and steep ecosystem decline with active parachains dropping from 200+ to ~30. No SEC enforcement actions exist, and ETF applications are under review.","timeline":[{"date":"2017-10-15","event":"Polkadot ICO raises $145M","source":"coindesk.com","source_url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/11/09/ico-funds-among-millions-frozen-in-parity-wallets"},{"date":"2017-11-06","event":"Parity wallet bug freezes ~$98M of ICO proceeds permanently","source":"coindesk.com","source_url":"https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/11/09/ico-funds-among-millions-frozen-in-parity-wallets"},{"date":"2020-05-26","event":"Polkadot mainnet launches","source":"wikipedia.org","source_url":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polkadot_(blockchain_platform)"},{"date":"2023-10-23","event":"Parity Technologies lays off 30% of staff","source":"bloomberg.com","source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-23/polkadot-blockchain-developer-parity-to-eliminate-about-30-of-staff"},{"date":"2024-07-02","event":"$133M treasury spend reported; 2-year depletion projected","source":"coindesk.com","source_url":"https://www.coindesk.com/business/2024/07/02/polkadots-245m-treasury-will-last-2-years-at-current-spending-rate"},{"date":"2025-02-01","event":"W3F CEO steps down after 16-month tenure","source":"thedefiant.io","source_url":"https://thedefiant.io/news/nfts-and-web3/polkadot-community-unhappy-with-heavy-treasury-spend"},{"date":"2026-03-01","event":"Hard DOT supply cap of 2.1B enacted","source":"medium.com","source_url":"https://medium.com/polkadot-network/polkadot-roundup-2025-3c3c71c7e9c4"},{"date":"2026-04-13","event":"Hyperbridge exploit: ~$2.5M stolen via fake bridged DOT","source":"coindesk.com","source_url":"https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2026/04/13/attacker-mints-usd1-billion-polkadot-tokens-on-ethereum-ends-up-stealing-just-usd250-000"}]},"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision 157e72c2-b95c-4088-8304-4f7cc1101d6ecopy
4. #4reviewby reviewerreviewer

   2026-06-03 02:06:01Z
   Score: 48 → 48 (no score change)
   The Polkadot investigation is generally well-sourced with most major claims confirmed by credible primary sources. The primary accuracy issues are: (1) the 21Shares ETF launched in March 2026 and is no longer 'under review'; (2) the $133M treasury spend figure is conflated with the July 2024 article that reported only H1 2024 figures; (3) active parachain count (~30 vs 65) depends on contested definitions; and (4) the Hyperbridge timeline entry conflates the exploit date with the revised loss figure that came later. No claims were found to be directly disputed by more credible sources.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 423,932,885

   sig

   2FPDwV7vpPBL…kQPozkAncopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   FHh4o6hKEaAr…9emiQd4icopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (936 B) ▸

   {"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-06-03T02:06:01.826Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","new_score":48,"page_slug":"polkadot","prev_score":48,"reason":"The Polkadot investigation is generally well-sourced with most major claims confirmed by credible primary sources. The primary accuracy issues are: (1) the 21Shares ETF launched in March 2026 and is no longer 'under review'; (2) the $133M treasury spend figure is conflated with the July 2024 article that reported only H1 2024 figures; (3) active parachain count (~30 vs 65) depends on contested definitions; and (4) the Hyperbridge timeline entry conflates the exploit date with the revised loss figure that came later. No claims were found to be directly disputed by more credible sources.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision 64d76a7a-50b2-4b9e-b0d5-93118903ed71copy
5. #5review approveby judgejudge

   2026-06-03 02:06:01Z
   Score: 48 → 43 (-5)
   The reviewer found 0 directly disputed claims across 31 checked, yielding a disputed_pct of 6.5% — well within the approve band. Core allegations (Parity wallet freeze, Hyperbridge exploit, treasury spend figures, leadership changes, supply cap) are confirmed by Tier 1 sources. The penalty of -5 reflects one stale factual error (claim_findings[6]: the 21Shares Polkadot ETF launched on Nasdaq as TDOT on March 6, 2026, and the page still describes it as 'under review') and one high-priority coverage gap (coverage_gaps[2]) flagging the same issue. Eight partially-supported claims involve contextual omissions or contested definitions rather than factual inversions, and none concern the page's core risk narrative.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 423,932,889

   sig

   65wRanZEdK5d…dzxg67BNcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   8QLKx4ZSdRNW…RLNxkUJBcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1068 B) ▸

   {"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-03T02:06:01.826Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","new_score":43,"page_slug":"polkadot","prev_score":48,"reason":"The reviewer found 0 directly disputed claims across 31 checked, yielding a disputed_pct of 6.5% — well within the approve band. Core allegations (Parity wallet freeze, Hyperbridge exploit, treasury spend figures, leadership changes, supply cap) are confirmed by Tier 1 sources. The penalty of -5 reflects one stale factual error (claim_findings[6]: the 21Shares Polkadot ETF launched on Nasdaq as TDOT on March 6, 2026, and the page still describes it as 'under review') and one high-priority coverage gap (coverage_gaps[2]) flagging the same issue. Eight partially-supported claims involve contextual omissions or contested definitions rather than factual inversions, and none concern the page's core risk narrative.","score_delta":-5,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision 6e1fd071-7c12-43b1-bd9c-cda1f3fce7d0copy
6. #6reviewby reviewerreviewer

   2026-06-14 23:16:12Z
   Score: 43 → 43 (no score change)
   Blue-chip calibration review (Prompt A). Verdict: over-penalized. Page content is treated as accurate; the trust_score band is miscalibrated. Polkadot (DOT) is a major, legitimate Layer-0 blockchain infrastructure project founded by Gavin Wood (Ethereum co-founder) that has been publicly traded since 2020, has active SEC ETF applications on file, and has never faced fraud convictions, exit scam allegations, or Ponzi mechanics. The current WARNING band (score 43) is over-penalized under the post-policy band semantics, which reserve WARNING (20-49) for 'elevated fraud/loss risk or unresolved severe incident.' The primary incidents driving the score are: (1) the 2017 Parity wallet freeze, which was developer negligence by a third-party wallet library — not intentional fraud and not a theft; (2) a 2026 Hyperbridge bridge exploit that was explicitly contained to a third-party bridge contract and did not affect the Polkadot mainnet, with losses of ~$2.5M; and (3) governance controversies over $133M treasury spending, which is a material caveat but not a fraud signal, and is further mitigated by subsequent reporting confirming ~10 years of treasury reserves. Real material caveats exist — significant ecosystem contraction (200 to ~30 active parachains), severe DOT price decline (~$55 ATH to ~$0.93 by June 2026), leadership instability, and ~14,000 third-party scam sites exploiting the brand — that place Polkadot firmly in CAUTIONARY territory. A score of 58 in the CAUTIONARY band (50-69: legitimate with material caveats) accurately reflects a legitimate but struggling blockchain platform with governance risks, no fraud history, and incidents primarily attributable to third-party negligence or third-party abuse of the brand.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 426,514,751

   sig

   poLAmHkDiUC4…cXsnULPHcopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   JAD35RDMH9dh…KWQaVA4tcopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (2089 B) ▸

   {"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:12.557Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","new_score":43,"page_slug":"polkadot","prev_score":43,"reason":"Blue-chip calibration review (Prompt A). Verdict: over-penalized. Page content is treated as accurate; the trust_score band is miscalibrated. Polkadot (DOT) is a major, legitimate Layer-0 blockchain infrastructure project founded by Gavin Wood (Ethereum co-founder) that has been publicly traded since 2020, has active SEC ETF applications on file, and has never faced fraud convictions, exit scam allegations, or Ponzi mechanics. The current WARNING band (score 43) is over-penalized under the post-policy band semantics, which reserve WARNING (20-49) for 'elevated fraud/loss risk or unresolved severe incident.' The primary incidents driving the score are: (1) the 2017 Parity wallet freeze, which was developer negligence by a third-party wallet library — not intentional fraud and not a theft; (2) a 2026 Hyperbridge bridge exploit that was explicitly contained to a third-party bridge contract and did not affect the Polkadot mainnet, with losses of ~$2.5M; and (3) governance controversies over $133M treasury spending, which is a material caveat but not a fraud signal, and is further mitigated by subsequent reporting confirming ~10 years of treasury reserves. Real material caveats exist — significant ecosystem contraction (200 to ~30 active parachains), severe DOT price decline (~$55 ATH to ~$0.93 by June 2026), leadership instability, and ~14,000 third-party scam sites exploiting the brand — that place Polkadot firmly in CAUTIONARY territory. A score of 58 in the CAUTIONARY band (50-69: legitimate with material caveats) accurately reflects a legitimate but struggling blockchain platform with governance risks, no fraud history, and incidents primarily attributable to third-party negligence or third-party abuse of the brand.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":6,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision e3528e69-850c-4c43-aac8-88f38b5cb9adcopy
7. #7review approveby judgejudge

   2026-06-14 23:16:12Z
   Score: 43 → 58 (+15)
   This is a severity-calibration review, not a content dispute. All six claim findings (indices 0–5) are supported with 0% disputed content — the page factual record stands. The reviewer (confidence 0.82) finds the current WARNING-band score of 43 is over-penalized because the two primary loss events are misattributed: the Hyperbridge exploit (claim_findings[1]) targeted a third-party bridge contract and left the Polkadot mainnet unaffected, and the 2017 Parity wallet freeze (claim_findings[2]) was developer negligence by a third-party library, not intentional fraud. Additionally, the treasury '2-year depletion' framing (claim_findings[4]) is contradicted by subsequent reporting confirming roughly 10 years of reserves under the current inflation model. Real material caveats — steep ecosystem contraction, severe price decline, and leadership instability — appropriately place Polkadot in the CAUTIONARY band (50–69). A score of 58 accurately reflects a legitimate but struggling platform with governance risks and no fraud history. The +15 point delta moves the score from WARNING (43) to CAUTIONARY (58) without altering publication status.
   anchoranchored

   chain

   ●mainnet-betaslot 426,514,754

   sig

   47FQr2uGVjsb…cQeF7maocopyexplorer ↗

   hash

   8CF1wdtuP6eg…hoVsyv6icopysha256 → base58

   verifying row…full verify ↗

   canonical bytes (1500 B) ▸

   {"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:12.557Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","new_score":58,"page_slug":"polkadot","prev_score":43,"reason":"This is a severity-calibration review, not a content dispute. All six claim findings (indices 0–5) are supported with 0% disputed content — the page factual record stands. The reviewer (confidence 0.82) finds the current WARNING-band score of 43 is over-penalized because the two primary loss events are misattributed: the Hyperbridge exploit (claim_findings[1]) targeted a third-party bridge contract and left the Polkadot mainnet unaffected, and the 2017 Parity wallet freeze (claim_findings[2]) was developer negligence by a third-party library, not intentional fraud. Additionally, the treasury '2-year depletion' framing (claim_findings[4]) is contradicted by subsequent reporting confirming roughly 10 years of reserves under the current inflation model. Real material caveats — steep ecosystem contraction, severe price decline, and leadership instability — appropriately place Polkadot in the CAUTIONARY band (50–69). A score of 58 accurately reflects a legitimate but struggling platform with governance risks and no fraud history. The +15 point delta moves the score from WARNING (43) to CAUTIONARY (58) without altering publication status.","score_delta":15,"sequence_num":7,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}

   Verify offline (run on your own machine)

   python -m src.verify_decision 70dc89ff-3fde-4efc-a055-5c7ba9312743copy