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.

Sequence
#3
Score
00 (-15)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
443522596
Off-chain at
2026-08-27T00:06:54.632Z
Anchored at
Block time

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
3rZfwLfpQfYJt7yWHsid15vtsNan4y1Nu1mDnJMSgpqK
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2136 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-27T00:06:54.395Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"ab67741e-aa53-4dae-a2e9-1552ff42dbba","new_score":0,"page_slug":"zyaire-wilkins-steam-malware-crypto-theft-ring","prev_score":0,"reason":"The page's core facts — Wilkins' identity, the July 14 arrest, the charge, the $220,000/8,000-computer/80-wallet figures, and the digital-forensics trail — are well corroborated across six independent outlets and were confirmed by the reviewer (claim_findings[0], [1], [9], [10], [22]-[26]). However, the review found a specific date error (the page's July 16 initial-appearance date is contradicted by contemporaneous reporting placing it on July 15, claim_findings[4]), an internal contradiction over how many game titles were publicly named (claim_findings[11] vs. [12]), pre-arrest security research presented as if it came from the criminal complaint (claim_findings[16]), a game removal misattributed to 'user reports' rather than a named researcher's analysis (claim_findings[31]), and, most seriously, a claim that 'a second unnamed individual is alleged to have assisted' that no source consulted supports — every account describes only Wilkins and one unnamed developer (claim_findings[28]). The page's title framing of a 'ring' is also not supported by any source, which describes at most a two-person conspiracy (claim_findings[33]). Using the reviewer's own per-claim array (34 findings, disputed_pct ≈ 14.7%) rather than its summary tally (38 claims, ≈15.8-16%), both land in the same 10-30% band, so this does not change the outcome. Given the accumulation of an apparently invented allegation, a title/entity overstatement, a factual date error, and misattributed sourcing — on a page about a person arrested six weeks ago who has not been indicted, tried, or convicted, and which has neither a presumption-of-innocence disclaimer nor any citation to the underlying complaint or docket — the page needs correction rather than removal.","score_delta":-15,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}