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 · Aptos
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 58 → 50 (-8)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 425205281
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-08T22:55:54.148Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- BbCFa6DPGZvA2RfVqpSGzww9zRe4Zyr5ahLmwXfAAM1i
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1667 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-08T22:55:53.875Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"41f72fa7-2b33-486c-9df0-5acff8a8040d","new_score":50,"page_slug":"aptos","prev_score":58,"reason":"The reviewer confirmed 20 of 28 claims and found 3 disputed items, placing the page at 14% disputed — within the minor-issues band. The most significant issue is claim_findings[8], where the page states the July 2022 valuation was 'four times' the prior valuation; Tier 2 sources (Crunchbase, CoinDesk) consistently show it was approximately double (2x), making the 4x figure a factual overstatement. claim_findings[18] contains a year error in a timeline entry — the October 2023 outage is attributed to an 'August 2022 commit' when the official Aptos incident report unambiguously identifies an August 2023 commit; the section body is correct but the timeline entry is not. claim_findings[20] notes a related timeline entry with a one-day date error on the tokenomics announcement (February 19 vs. official February 18). Additionally, claim_findings[20] (partially supported) identifies a meaningful overstatement: the page says the court 'denied' Shaikh's motion to dismiss the Glazer lawsuit, when multiple sources confirm only a partial denial — the fraud claim itself was dismissed. These errors are factual but limited in scope; no core risk allegations are disputed, no link rot is present, and reviewer confidence is 0.82. The page requires targeted corrections before the disputed items are considered resolved.","score_delta":-8,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}