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 · Sky (MakerDAO)
- Sequence
- #5
- Score
- 83 → 83 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 457596479
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-16T10:00:35.134Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-16T10:00:50.812Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- BEGhZMYoez9w6dvfbVdZJZhdhRnL7E5mAKU53CQJRXXq
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2256 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"a7126d713b2808c3e49fd442a2c74055","decided_at":"2026-10-16T10:00:34.835Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.25,"findings_hash":"5SFfLTj8M8A7BtbbwjFciQvWvsdiC5bfWWhNdSDtfuM5","investigation_id":"a19f2993-f03b-4b55-ba33-7f77dadac14c","mode":"findings_only","new_score":83,"page_content_hash":"4a58a7e2e08ded823422007896def1a582bd842fc7c6f97c11c800f4dd0012ac","page_slug":"sky-makerdao","prev_score":83,"reason":"Most of the page's core factual claims — the Black Thursday timeline and dollar figures, the 2024 rebrand mechanics, the DSChief and flash-loan security incidents, the DAI depeg events, the USDS freeze-function controversy, the Endgame Plan/NewChain/Vitalik episode, the Tornado Cash contingency planning, and the Mushegian death's 'no foul play' finding — are well supported by the cited sources and corroborating independent reporting. However, three findings should be corrected before this version is relied upon: (1) the governance-centralization statistic attributed to the cited arXiv paper ('top 3 holders controlled 78%+ of votes') does not appear anywhere in that paper, which I read in full; (2) the Centrifuge RWA bad-debt figure of '$5.8M across two pools' is roughly 50% higher than the ~$3.9M combined total supported by contemporaneous reporting, and the cited source covers only one of the two pools; and (3) the MKR-to-SKY conversion penalty is dated to May 2025 in both the prose and the timeline, when the cited source itself places the vote in September 2025. Additional softer issues: the Metronym settlement date (April 2023) could not be verified against court-record reporting, which shows preliminary approval in August 2023 and final approval in February 2024; the claim that flash-loan manipulation 'led to Governance Security Module implementation' reverses the sequence (GSM predated the October 2020 incident); 'died by drowning' overstates an officially undetermined cause of death; and the USDS supply/growth figure is hard to pin to one consistent, dated snapshot given how volatile and inconsistently reported this metric is.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}