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 · Midnight (NIGHT Token)
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 52 → 52 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443523544
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-27T03:59:14.023Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 5WSnGUHHS91Zqn9QFxR3yLsEQ1F2UbGDEqqHLWrt6b3E
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1361 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-27T03:59:13.902Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"218911ca-385a-47de-bcf3-b74916c5fa74","new_score":52,"page_slug":"midnight-night-token","prev_score":52,"reason":"The page correctly and consistently identifies the Cardano/IOG-linked Midnight privacy blockchain (no name-collision with an unrelated project), and the large majority of its factual claims -- tokenomics, Glacier Drop mechanics, mainnet launch date, the July 2026 Wanchain bridge exploit details, the OpenZeppelin partnership, and the bridge-architecture controversy -- are independently corroborated by multiple credible, current sources. The most significant defect found is a timeline entry that misdates a December 2022 phishing incident as a July 2026 event, conflating a roughly 3.5-year-old scam wave with the recent bridge-exploit news cycle; the corresponding prose section frames the same incident correctly, so the error is localized to the timeline. Two claims (an imprecise $100M IOG investment attribution, and an understated allocation-transparency hedge) are partially supported, and a small number of negative/absence claims about regulatory action are unverifiable rather than confirmed.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}