Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-25T18:15:15.066Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"11ac1ead-84f7-4d0f-8a52-15836cc5d6b8","new_score":42,"page_slug":"cosmos-atom","prev_score":54,"reason":"Recomputing disputed_pct from the authoritative claim_findings array (3 disputed + 0 unverifiable out of 23 claims) gives 13.0%, placing this page in the low end of the minor-issues band. The page's disposition holds up: 19 of 23 claims were independently confirmed, including primary-source verification of its most serious allegation (North Korean-linked developer involvement in the Liquid Staking Module), and the reviewer found no claim of project abandonment or inactivity that the page's own history would contradict. However, one disputed claim is serious rather than cosmetic: claim_findings[17] states a January 2024 proposal to zero out minimum ATOM inflation 'received approximately 95% community support,' when the on-chain record and contemporaneous reporting show that proposal was rejected, with only about 25% in favor. On a page whose subject is governance risk, reporting a failed vote as an overwhelming success is a meaningful factual inversion, not a rounding error, and it keeps the delta from sitting at the floor of the band. A second disputed claim, claim_findings[21], states no SEC security classification has been identified for ATOM, omitting that the SEC named ATOM an alleged unregistered security in its 2023 complaint against Binance -- a case dismissed in ATOM's favor in 2025. This error runs toward the subject rather than against it, and the more honest treatment would have disclosed and then contextualized the designation rather than omitting it; it is weighted as a real inaccuracy but a lesser one, since the underlying legal exposure is in fact resolved. A third disputed claim, claim_findings[12], misplaces Ignite CEO Peng Zhong's departure in 'late 2022' when the page's own cited source dates it to July 2022; this is a minor timing error that does not change the substance of the leadership-fragmentation narrative. None of the four coverage gaps were flagged high priority, and the reviewer explicitly noted the page makes no unsubstantiated abandonment claim needing rebuttal, so gaps here argue for expansion rather than penalty. No link rot or staleness was found on critical citations. Reviewer confidence was 0.80, supporting a normal rather than softened penalty.","score_delta":-12,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}