Skip to main content
Sign in
← avoid.net

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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_approve · Curve LlamaLend
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#3
Score
52 → 52 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
425432768
Off-chain at
2026-06-10T00:03:12.276Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
7sMAuhgrRWH8egCPyjmTvSH58T9uq9RHw4GbPjEyvBoW
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1233 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-10T00:03:12.128Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"b20a5ebe-152f-4198-9df6-0987e1950faf","new_score":52,"page_slug":"curve-llamalend","prev_score":52,"reason":"The review assessed 16 claims and found 14 confirmed, 1 partially supported, and 1 unverifiable — yielding a disputed_pct of 6.25%, within the 0–10% approval band. The one unverifiable claim (claim_findings[6]: a ZachXBT flag directed at Curve LlamaLend) appears in the summary as a supporting detail with no corroborating source, but it is not a core allegation and does not affect the accuracy of the incident record. The one partially-supported claim (claim_findings[10]: June 15 repayment date) has all material facts confirmed by Tier 1 sources; only the specific date is unverifiable due to a 404 on the cited CoinTelegraph URL. Two high-priority coverage gaps exist — the governance concentration claim lacks quantitative support, and all nine section content fields are empty — but gaps indicate areas for expansion rather than grounds for denial under platform policy.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}