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 · Odin.Fun
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 48 → 48 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462175189
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T18:39:23.850Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T18:39:27.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T18:39:27.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- AJFuLFFFFNa7XtNHFdyjA5su2YvXMMwSKpgx2id2prTf
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2019 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"649e3a6f61edf86f25e789be51bd62bc","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T18:39:23.585Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.125,"investigation_id":"18dce3db-c99a-48b7-933b-b108f1d2e328","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":48,"page_slug":"odinfun","prev_score":48,"reason":"Of 8 reviewed claims, 5 were confirmed, 2 were partially supported (claim_findings[2] launch month was the private beta with public launch about February 2025; claim_findings[5] is supported only through August 19, 2025) and 1 was unverifiable (claim_findings[7], a stored archive link pointing to an unrelated article), giving a disputed share of 12.5%. The core facts of the 58.2 BTC (~$7M) August exploit, the reserve figures, the August 19 update and the March anomaly check out against the sources. The page is revised rather than approved because the review found a material omission and a high-priority coverage gap: the page stops in August 2025 and says nothing about whether trading resumed, the audit was published or users were compensated. The penalty sits in the upper part of the minor band for that reason, softened because the reviewer's confidence was moderate and it could not source the current status.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"severity_override":{"applied":false,"band":null,"from_band":"minor","reason":"The material omission (no update after August 19, 2025) is real, but the page already states its information is current only to late August 2025, and the reviewer could not find any source showing a reopening, compensation or shutdown, so there is no sourced contradiction to escalate on. The omission is handled through the upper-band penalty and the revise verdict instead."},"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}