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
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 457523487
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-16T05:38:23.074Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-16T05:38:53.878Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 4721xcZqonKxbHTTRz4By81fkzzewEtmYbDtjtp3J8Eo
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2181 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"e17f666ff961e10e977d12c4770de5f1","decided_at":"2026-10-16T05:38:22.819Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.1923,"findings_hash":"22B1crkG6SFXQK6qs64BuUgim3qtdoQYjkNp9pzhVuPk","investigation_id":"f6f77518-dd5a-4dd9-af79-69e44c34b339","mode":"findings_only","new_score":0,"page_content_hash":"b0a17acf1b7b1b3e2715b1cef0b256d69d44cd46c553d2411782e8bcaaa97d19","page_slug":"goliath-ventures-christopher-delgado","prev_score":0,"reason":"The page's core narrative — Delgado's arrest, guilty plea, admitted $250 million in losses, the $400 million raised with only roughly $1-1.5 million ever actually placed in crypto liquidity pools, the asset forfeiture, the Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and the JPMorgan Chase class action — is well supported by DOJ/IRS-CI primary sources and corroborating news coverage, including an independent Wikipedia summary of the case. Two concrete factual problems were found: the Asset Misappropriation section conflates figures from two separate DOJ filings, attributing the $17 million purchase figure (which the civil forfeiture complaint ties to five homes plus office space) to 'eight residential properties' (a count that actually comes from the later, separate plea forfeiture list); and the JPMorgan lawsuit is dated one day late (March 12 instead of March 11, 2026) in both the relevant section and the timeline, per the cited source's own wording. The page's top-level summary also was not updated after section 3 was revised to note the sentencing date moved from October 8 to October 21, 2026, leaving a stale date in the summary. The specific criminal case number and judge's name given in the Guilty Plea section could not be verified against any accessible independent source and should be checked against the court docket directly. The My Liquidity Partner/Verlin Sanciangco material and several named-individual claims (Malkemes, Kumpusch, Fundora) rest on a single blogger's reporting; the page's own hedging on this is appropriate and should be preserved.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}