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_revise · Tether Gold (XAUT)
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 44 → 31 (-13)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443525758
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-27T11:06:14.114Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 9Jbcmkebs16NJcWHe4ThTSSdMP842224HQbjuueHcRGg
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1581 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-27T11:06:13.447Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"54857b48-114c-4c9a-96db-b4cfb07058d9","new_score":31,"page_slug":"tether-gold-xaut","prev_score":44,"reason":"The review's own summary block undercounts its findings; the actual array contains 26 claims — 17 confirmed, 4 disputed, 2 unverifiable, 2 partially supported, 1 stale — putting the disputed-plus-unverifiable rate at about 23%, within the range calling for revision rather than escalation. The most consequential error is that the page states the wrong gold-reserve quantity for the June 30, 2025 date, a figure that contradicts the page's own cited attestation PDF and is repeated in both the page summary and its timeline even though the correct figure already appears correctly in the body of section 2 (claim_findings[2], claim_findings[13]). Two further disputed items are a self-contradictory account of where the issuer was incorporated at its 2020 launch (claim_findings[6]) and an 11-month misdating of a $150 million Gold.com investment (claim_findings[18]) — detail and date errors rather than disputes over the page's central risk allegations. A stale finding shows the page describes a planned Big Four audit that Tether has since reported completing (claim_findings[12]); because this makes the subject look less audited than it currently is, it argues for updating the page rather than for a harsher penalty.","score_delta":-13,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}