Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
← 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 · PlayDapp
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#2
Score
22 → 22 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
443520448
Off-chain at
2026-08-26T11:17:43.373Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
HvHxAy4mEsZYSrNhJt5Cn2RNJCtPZCHrbjLU7js2jpBp
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1043 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-26T11:17:43.281Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"90804b6a-5edb-4b8e-86e6-1fe06e92c10a","new_score":22,"page_slug":"playdapp","prev_score":22,"reason":"The page's factual claims in the summary and timeline are well supported by primary and independent secondary sources, including precise reconciling arithmetic between the two minting events and the aggregate $290M figure, and it correctly labels that figure as a nominal (not realized) loss while also documenting the token migration remediation. The main deficiency is structural rather than factual: all six section bodies are empty despite carrying headings and sourced citations, and the narrative omits post-2024 developments (exchange delistings, current token status) and lacks any usable text on the disputed Lazarus Group attribution, whose cited source does not actually discuss PlayDapp.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}