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
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 2 → 2 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443517775
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T22:29:33.408Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 6i67geqKj8FQBoYHAHBaUQu1x6tqU4gZr2pdBRmFcfLg
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1482 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-25T22:29:33.229Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"79dfde41-3b34-4e86-bd07-77de7e4846e9","new_score":2,"page_slug":"zhuoying-chen-haojie-zhang-43m-pig-butchering-laundering-network","prev_score":2,"reason":"Recomputing from the reviewer's own claim_findings array (29 entries, not the 30 stated in the summary block) gives 25 confirmed, 2 partially_supported, 1 unverifiable, 1 link_rot, and 0 disputed. Per the reviewer's own disputed_pct formula (disputed + unverifiable / total), that is 1/29, or about 3.4% — well inside the 0-10% approve band. Every claim bearing on the core allegation (identities, charge, statutory maximum, the $43M / 140-account / 45-shell-company figures, and the presumption-of-innocence framing) is independently corroborated by the DOJ release and multiple secondary outlets, and no source contradicts any of it. The defects found are peripheral: a dead IRS-CI link on a secondary agency-role claim (claim_findings[19]), a statistic that is accurate but wrongly attached to a Forbes article that doesn't contain it (claim_findings[13]), and a DOJ quotation that is a paraphrase presented in quotation marks rather than the agency's verbatim boilerplate (claim_findings[25]). None of these touch the substance of the allegation against the named defendants.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}