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 · Amazon Web Services
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 75 → 65 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 423951603
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-03T04:10:33.054Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- A8eqs2TQzgd8JCq1TspEzURYXiUwQr9yVv8gGJni8u1w
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1172 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-03T04:10:32.383Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"8b30f4bf-6cf5-4ebe-9a2d-168e5d641f39","new_score":65,"page_slug":"amazon-web-services","prev_score":75,"reason":"The review confirmed 12 of 19 claims and found one outright disputed claim: the summary's assertion that AWS controls 38% of the cloud infrastructure market, which three sources including a Tier 1 Statista dataset place at 28-31% for the broad market (claim_findings[0]). Because this figure appears in the page lede as a core characterization, it carries disproportionate weight. Four additional claims are only partially supported — most notably the BIPA litigation section (claim_findings[14]), which does not reflect the Third Circuit's May 2026 dismissal of the federal case, a high-priority gap flagged by the reviewer. The internal GenAI memo claim (claim_findings[8]) could not be verified against any cited secondary source. No link rot was detected and the majority of factual content is well-sourced.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}