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 · Circle USYC
- Sequence
- #5
- Score
- 77 → 77 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 459462076
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-21T02:26:44.014Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-21T02:27:12.635Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 6dd1abH5iGtoqajdJv9TVKWEpAhroU1itoTEmxJnp5bt
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2228 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"ecc30bfffebeb826736cf00f6184d638","decided_at":"2026-10-21T02:26:43.847Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.0435,"findings_hash":"Dh2mV2LcgUsFTZXaCnpdZTV51La4v8kuD33qsQkmDkdw","investigation_id":"a1ccc281-70f2-407f-852f-d7ffbe8daa27","mode":"findings_only","new_score":77,"page_content_hash":"59aa3645e4e8e978e2fbf66de66a304480a349da2184ff93128a894e815ab48f","page_slug":"circle-usyc","prev_score":77,"reason":"The page's core factual backbone — the Circle/Hashnote deal timeline and structure, USYC's Reg S/non-U.S.-person restriction, KYC/Allowlist/Chainalysis sanctions-screening mechanics, price/NAV oracle and audit claims, the Usual/USD0++ depeg narrative, and the multi-chain AUM growth and BUIDL-overtake claims — is well supported by the cited sources and by independent verification performed during this review. Two defects stand out: the BlackRock BUIDL comparison mischaracterizes its investor-eligibility standard as 'accredited investors' when the cited source itself says 'qualified purchasers' (a materially higher bar), and the multi-chain expansion section describes BNB Chain as merely 'planned' even though Circle's own blog and the page's own cited source confirm BNB Chain launched in November 2025 and became USYC's largest single-chain deployment well before the 'mid-2026' timeframe used in the same sentence. A secondary, narrower issue is that the claim 'sources reviewed indicate USYC's own price and redeemability were not disrupted' during the Usual depeg overstates what the four cited sources actually say — they are silent on USYC's own price/redemption behavior rather than affirmatively confirming it was undisrupted. One cited/used source (ChainCatcher) is now a dead link (HTTP 410). Overall the page is well-sourced and its central risk characterization (permissioned, centrally-gated institutional product, not implicated in the Usual depeg) holds up, but it would benefit from the corrections above and broader coverage of conflicts of interest, insolvency risk, and independent on-chain verification.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}