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_approve · Velodrome
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 423940061
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-03T02:53:52.908Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 3RhCAmEehvE2z9A1biy1VgfSrrkHgp3wrbDYGTDxysji
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1525 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-03T02:53:52.723Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"a2e62b81-3607-4a0a-b5da-cb39ef9f945d","new_score":0,"page_slug":"velodrome","prev_score":0,"reason":"The reviewer examined 32 claims and found 25 confirmed, 5 partially supported, and 1 disputed, yielding a disputed_pct of 6.25% — within the 0–10% approve band. The sole disputed claim (claim_findings[1]) is a minor internal inconsistency: sections[0] states the launch date as June 1, 2022, while the summary and all external sources consistently give June 2, 2022. This is an editorial error in one section, not a disputed core allegation about misconduct or losses. The link rot finding affects a CoinTelegraph URL, but the corresponding archived URL is present in sources_used, substantially mitigating its evidentiary impact. The Gabagool theft-amount nuance (claim_findings[4] and claim_findings[30]) is classified as partially_supported, not disputed: the page's $350,000 figure is accurate for the August 4 event but omits an additional $56,000 Gabagool had previously taken, a factual gap rather than a fabrication. All major incident claims — the 2022 insider theft, the 2023 dual DNS attack, and the 2025 NameSilo compromise — are confirmed by multiple Tier 1 sources. Coverage gaps are expansion opportunities only and do not undermine the page's factual integrity.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}