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 · OverHere Limited / Clinton So
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 18 → 18 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443522123
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-26T21:07:51.273Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 6zPMKPX3q8dJ4CYqMuejpjPz8CLw8hD5seyBRsURwX3S
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1299 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-26T21:07:51.082Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"db6fb986-b932-485a-a2cd-5324325fb39a","new_score":18,"page_slug":"overhere-clinton-so","prev_score":18,"reason":"The page is substantially well-sourced and, notably, applies the named-individual evidentiary standard correctly: it does not assert an indictment (only a civil securities class action, confirmed against primary/secondary sources), does not attribute unsourced 'prior history' to Clinton So, cites the correct statute (Securities Act of 1933, Sections 5/12(a)(1)), and cleanly separates the SEC's clearance of Haliey Welch from the still-unresolved civil exposure of So and OverHere. The main defects found are a mischaracterized $3.3 million figure (conflating token-sale proceeds with the peak-price value of an allocation), an incorrect docket number for a related case, a day-placeholder date on the amended-complaint timeline entry, source-list/archive-url integrity issues, and a significant unreconciled inconsistency with the sibling investigation page over the governing statute and collapse percentage for the same underlying lawsuit.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}