Verify a decision
Every moderation decision on AVOID.NET is anchored to the Solana blockchain. You don't have to trust us — you can verify cryptographically that we committed to a verdict at a specific moment and have not rewritten it.
How verification works
- We commit. When a moderator accepts/rejects a submission, we serialize the decision into deterministic UTF-8 bytes (
payload_canonical_string), hash it with SHA-256, encode the digest as base58, and write it to Solana inside an SPL Memo v2 transaction. - We store the bytes. The exact bytes we hashed are stored alongside the decision in our database. Anyone can read them and recompute the hash in any language.
- You compare three values. Database hash, your independently-recomputed hash, and the hash inside the on-chain memo. If all three match, the decision is authentic and timestamped.
The on-chain memo format is
AVOID.NET|v1|h:<b58-sha256>|d:<id>|t:<iso>Find a signature on any investigation page's decision log, or run python -m src.verify_decision --signature <sig> for a CLI check.
Decision
review_revise · Honeyland
- Sequence
- #5
- Score
- 44 → 34 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 425409555
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-09T21:30:04.699Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 65c5RaCmcMt7npzM2SzraAmBnJ5aThkhkesBV7fkqQeV
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1297 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-09T21:30:04.374Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"ff053e4d-9131-4362-8c19-689007576d76","new_score":34,"page_slug":"honeyland","prev_score":44,"reason":"The review confirmed 22 of 33 checked claims and identified two disputed claims requiring correction. claim_findings[8] states that Justin Barr joined Tracking202 in 2009, but a Tier 1 source (TechCrunch) and a corroborating Tier 2 source both identify Tracking202's co-founders as entirely different individuals, with no public record connecting Barr to that company; his documented background involves Tapit!/Phunware instead. claim_findings[23] states that Private A investors hold 5% with no cliff, while multiple independent tokenomics sources document 3.67% and a 1-month cliff. Neither error undermines the page's core risk conclusions — the token collapse, acquisition, and regulatory clean status are all well-supported — but both are factual inaccuracies in sections readers rely on for due diligence. Two high-priority coverage gaps (on-chain analytics and the Barr biography) also warrant revision before the page is treated as final.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}