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 · OlympusDAO
- Sequence
- #5
- Score
- 42 → 42 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 455539229
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-11T05:40:53.047Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-11T05:41:21.551Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 9Q2MdUS7WR7d3HduwD9SMgJQ8KgJW6vAyaqmpV6tFbzG
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2357 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"8288a16a73ca9a716c8c91cdcc51a861","decided_at":"2026-10-11T05:40:52.878Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.4545,"findings_hash":"G27y4GribjxyW96BwS6kwrDvGyLXVvhGGuFiDfp5XL4m","investigation_id":"d4a96a3a-5e0d-4789-85c3-1d88ae66379d","mode":"findings_only","new_score":42,"page_content_hash":"5a27f1e1f777df939f6a64dfe4b5298c4f3c77298f9595307ff9abec43e835cc","page_slug":"olympusdao","prev_score":42,"reason":"The page's core narrative — OlympusDAO's 2021 rise, the (3,3)/rebase mechanics, the 2022 collapse and cascading liquidations, the Bond Protocol exploit, the Liang lawsuit, and the broad outline of the Ikkurty CFTC case — is well supported by credible, independently verifiable sources, and several of its most scrutiny-worthy claims (the exploit figures, the Liang lawsuit details, the Wonderland/QuadrigaCX link) held up under direct verification. However, the review surfaced a cluster of date and attribution errors concentrated in two areas: (1) the 2021 all-time-high price and market-cap figures are misdated to October-November 2021 when independent, CoinGecko-sourced reporting (including a contemporaneous January 2022 article) consistently places the market-cap and CoinGecko-tracked price peaks in April 2021; and (2) the Ikkurty/CFTC section conflates the July 2024 summary judgment (~$120.6M in restitution plus disgorgement) with the September 2024 final judgment ($209.6M total including a civil penalty), and separately misattributes the court's 'classic Ponzi scheme' quote — which the order applied to Ikkurty's carbon-offset program — to the OHM-invested fund specifically. A September 2025 launch date given for Convertible Deposits also appears to be about two months early based on OlympusDAO's own governance-call notes, which describe the product as still mid-audit in early October 2025 and newly launched as of a November 6, 2025 call. One citation (darik.news, supporting an unverified 'Zeus' identity claim) is dead with no live replacement found. Several 2025 product-development claims (Chainlink CCIP/Solana, exact Morpho vault launch date) could not be independently corroborated and are marked unverifiable rather than disputed.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}