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 · Key Coin Assets Ltd
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 2 → 2 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443510616
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T03:00:55.227Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- ApePffrFzE5NTTVt2FJHBxPyFX51tSmvKQ3xnjY4mv2X
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1467 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T03:00:55.007Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"408f5863-f16b-4698-95f0-9d97a80692e1","new_score":2,"page_slug":"key-coin-assets-ltd","prev_score":2,"reason":"The page's claims are strongly corroborated by direct, successful fetches of primary sources (GOV.UK Insolvency Service press release, FCA warning page, Companies House company and officer records) and multiple independent secondary outlets (IBTimes UK, LexisNexis, Crowdfund Insider, Wired-Gov mirror). All factual assertions about the FCA warning, the winding-up order, the £300,000/nine-investor loss figure, the scheme mechanics, and director appointment history check out verbatim against primary sources. The one notable soft spot is the page's 'Current Status' claim that the company is now 'in compulsory liquidation' — the live Companies House register and a third-party insolvency aggregator had not yet reflected this status as of the review date, which is most likely a registry-update lag but is not explicitly acknowledged on the page. Allegations of fraud and Ponzi-scheme conduct are consistently and appropriately attributed to the Insolvency Service's investigative conclusions rather than stated as adjudicated criminal fact, and the page correctly notes no criminal charges have been announced.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}