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 · HEEBOO
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 62 → 54 (-8)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443561868
- Off-chain at
- 2026-09-02T00:39:55.577Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- H46u8J83Rj24K7JngVhe34GbmD8PVQfzippL1er6jkGt
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1758 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"9423fb0588ef248e779ce8caff2187b5","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-09-02T00:39:55.339Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.1739,"investigation_id":"0dac514c-7a57-41e4-8164-d94248f26de2","new_score":54,"page_slug":"heeboo","prev_score":62,"reason":"The reviewer found zero disputed claims out of 21 checked (disputed_pct 0.14, all in the partially_supported/unverifiable bands, not the disputed band), with the page's core factual claims -- corporate structure, leadership bios, the Amazon Prime Video deal, and the detailed $HEEBOO tokenomics -- independently confirmed against primary and independent sources (claim_findings[6], [8], [9], [12]). The issues that were found are minor: the page slightly overstates studio-credit attribution to two named founders versus the wider team (claim_findings[2]), and one timeline date (Popkins launch) is off by about four weeks (claim_findings[10]). A handful of absence-based claims (no legal disclaimers found, no exchange listing, no regulatory action) could not be independently confirmed or denied (claim_findings[14], [15], [16], [21]), which is an inherent limit of proving a negative rather than a contradiction. The reviewer also flagged a high-priority coverage gap -- no on-chain check that the treasury and team wallets match the published tokenomics or of treasury wallet activity since token launch -- which is material given the page's own risk flag on the fully-unlocked 12.5% treasury allocation, and this gap alone warrants a revision cycle even though nothing was disproven.","score_delta":-8,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}