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 · OpenAI
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 48 → 48 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 449571003
- Off-chain at
- 2026-09-23T02:43:36.867Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 7oBprt4E35rc7ur6z5UCbYnqXET46FEt5WZpLBQdUWRu
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1924 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"e401a900022e9ac915194f3a3f5098bb","decided_at":"2026-09-23T02:43:36.500Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0,"findings_hash":"8r1FQNvH3C2CgDkKSKVZWS2nQJxzHPF1j3zJjLEQctkz","investigation_id":"79663a8f-6c02-43d8-a093-165a74f4295d","new_score":48,"page_content_hash":"058e91dd0cb41e54729a3d4b873fd0a0cff20ce9b8f2f03cf864b3326259ad7e","page_slug":"openai","prev_score":48,"reason":"This page is well-sourced and its major factual claims — the NYT copyright suit and its September 2026 unsealed-filing developments, the Musk v. Altman jury verdict and its statute-of-limitations basis, the October 2025 restructuring MOU and the Foundation's ~26%/$130B stake, the Italian Garante fine and its March 2026 annulment on jurisdictional grounds, the FTC's 2023 CID, the March 2023 data breach, the wrongful-death suits, the November 2023 board crisis, and the Worldcoin/crypto-impersonation material — all check out against independent tier-1 and tier-2 reporting located directly. No claim was found to be disputed, stale, or supported by a dead link; every cited URL sampled resolved to content matching the page's characterization. The only defect found is a minor omission in the data-breach section, which lists the exposed billing fields but drops the card-expiration-date field that the cited source itself reports — an easy, low-stakes completeness fix rather than a substantive inaccuracy. The page's hedging language ('allegations,' 'unproven,' 'disputes') is used appropriately throughout for contested/pending litigation. No accepted community submissions were present to review. Coverage gaps are minor and mostly about optional context (EU-wide GDPR exposure beyond Italy, financial condition) rather than missing risk-relevant facts.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}