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 · Polkadot
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#4
Score
48 → 48 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
423932885
Off-chain at
2026-06-03T02:06:01.900Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
FHh4o6hKEaArCVN7msxVgCCQ5ekEnEqv6P5E9emiQd4i
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (936 chars)
{"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}