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
- #2
- Score
- 30 → 30 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443521544
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-26T15:39:48.873Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 9kAXqqx18nGYE5VjqbnQnSRycvPfrdHrSEmjNfxx2HrB
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1548 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-26T15:39:48.392Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"f560fedf-cb5b-4bac-8635-73da15489f52","new_score":30,"page_slug":"axiom-exchange-employee-insider-trading-scandal","prev_score":30,"reason":"The page's core narrative -- an unresolved allegation, not a legal finding, of internal-data-abuse-enabled front-running by an Axiom employee named Broox Bauer, alongside associates -- is well-supported by ZachXBT's original investigation and consistently corroborated across independent tier-1 and tier-2 outlets, including exact quotes, dates, and Polymarket-related figures that were independently verified to be internally consistent. The page correctly refrains from broadening the allegation to Axiom's co-founders, correctly frames all insider-trading language as allegation rather than adjudicated fact, and correctly notes the absence of regulatory or legal action, which remains true as of this review. The main weaknesses found are: one claim (Bauer's suspension) that could not be traced to any source; several timeline dates presented with false day-level precision when sources only support month-level accuracy; and a structural risk of reader confusion between two distinct, separately-sourced Polymarket profit figures ($411k for an anonymous 'predictorxyz' account and $421k for a separately wallet-traced, still-unconfirmed Bauer-linked account).","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}