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 · bc1qtkv6qcgq3qhqcdsk88wey50je0wk07s6erjrr9
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 40 → 30 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 425418096
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-09T22:26:38.050Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- A4qLKAJ4w7vorx1JmgQBEJoTvifad3XM5yPcPRyXVRCD
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1282 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-09T22:26:37.749Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"0ab4a937-de5a-4e31-b57a-29b1ee03248a","new_score":30,"page_slug":"bc1qtkv6qcgq3qhqcdsk88wey50je0wk07s6erjrr9","prev_score":40,"reason":"14 of 19 claims were confirmed against Tier 1 on-chain sources with no link rot or stale citations. Two claims were disputed by the reviewer: claim_findings[13] states the upstream fan-out transaction dispersed funds across 20 addresses when the actual output count is 41, and claim_findings[14] repeats the output-count error while also overstating the transaction value by 100x (stating '85 BTC' where the correct figure is 0.851 BTC). The 85 BTC figure appears in the Risk Indicators section where it directly shapes the reader's perception of the fund-flow scale; this is a material misrepresentation even though the core address-level facts (balance, tx count, amounts, block heights, timestamps) are all accurate. A -10 modifier is applied within the 10-30% disputed band; reviewer confidence is high (0.92) and the errors share a clear root cause, making a targeted revision straightforward.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}