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_approve · Balancer
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 32 → 32 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 426276053
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-13T20:59:00.578Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- AeKRaviyDCZYtAmavueQX8FGwg34vkzehCyUy8x6uZ3w
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1211 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-13T20:59:00.386Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"36f75834-67ae-4c11-b2be-78c9066f6778","new_score":32,"page_slug":"balancer","prev_score":32,"reason":"The reviewer checked 18 claims and found zero disputed. Twelve claims were fully confirmed by Tier 1 or Tier 2 sources; four were partially supported due to minor imprecision — notably the BAL token allocation (claim_findings[8]) omits a 10M ecosystem/fundraising tranche, the August 22 vulnerability disclosure (claim_findings[12]) conflates an initial risk figure with a two-day-later status update, and the September 2023 DNS theft figure (claim_findings[14]) varies by ~$15K across sources. None of these imprecisions touch the page's core allegations. Two high-priority coverage gaps exist — missing on-chain wallet and transaction evidence, and nine section fields that are empty skeleton structures — but coverage gaps indicate areas for expansion rather than grounds for denial. Reviewer confidence of 0.82 supports approving the page as factually sound.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}