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 · Ben Pasternak / Believe / LAUNCHCOIN
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 6 → 0 (-15)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443521472
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-26T15:13:16.538Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- H7abgKD6BrZyXox9wWfhku1eQ7Gx5jkVrzDQjQYxByaH
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1610 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-26T15:13:15.942Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"2a623f6b-0253-430c-bb2b-3ec76d9c4b26","new_score":0,"page_slug":"ben-pasternak-believe-launchcoin","prev_score":6,"reason":"Independent verification confirms 30 of 37 claims outright and finds no contradictions in the page's core civil-litigation narrative, which was checked verbatim against the actual filed complaint (claim_findings[18]-[27]), and no contradictions in the separately documented criminal assault arrest (claim_findings[30]-[32]). Set against that, the page states as fact — in its summary and in a dedicated section — that Pasternak faces a separate criminal indictment for crypto fraud in New York; the civil complaint the page otherwise relies on never uses the words 'criminal' or 'indict,' no DOJ or USAO-SDNY record could be located, and the page's own tier-1 sources describe only the civil suit (claim_findings[5], [28], [29]). This is a distinct error from the correctly-reported assault case, not a conflation of the two, and it names a living, non-convicted person. Additional, lower-severity errors include a peak market-cap figure that conflicts with the primary complaint (claim_findings[16]), a company founding year off by one (claim_findings[11]), two headline dollar figures presented as settled fact rather than a plaintiff's estimate (claim_findings[1], [2]), and a source list that both over- and under-lists its citations.","score_delta":-15,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}