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
- #5
- Score
- 26 → 26 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 457762187
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-16T19:57:53.319Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-16T19:58:14.174Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Hq6USAGa3gcvh1HRERUtU4hb1cccPvfp3VP3nypirsZS
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1822 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"31f2b8657a96892a2bddadfabb93e0fd","decided_at":"2026-10-16T19:57:52.900Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.3333,"findings_hash":"FbDZa4zK71h67VtKY7w5LjXicXdtxnDruRPpVS8NtdAx","investigation_id":"9ec13dfb-edc3-4d97-8d15-90dbcd780c2f","mode":"findings_only","new_score":26,"page_content_hash":"3bd4725cbc993a427e52fab9818cfaa7c8b263ed44cf073973b34e8422cc3ed3","page_slug":"donald-basile-bitcoin-latinum-btcl","prev_score":26,"reason":"The page's central narrative — the April 2026 SEC fraud complaint against Basile, GIBF GP, and Monsoon Blockchain over fabricated insurance/trust claims and misappropriated SAFT proceeds — is well-sourced and independently confirmed via direct review of the SEC litigation release and multiple reputable outlets, as are the core facts of the Jonna and Assofi civil suits and the Sixth Circuit arbitration ruling. However, several claims are weaker than presented: the Jonna investment figure is rounded down from the actual ~$541,000 cited in the page's own source, the Violin Memory 'departed the board' framing omits a well-documented CEO termination and gets the departure month wrong by a month, the 'founded Roman DBDR' claim overstates a co-CEO role, and the Corporate Structure section mischaracterizes an unregistered-securities allegation as a business-registration allegation using its own cited source. A Forbes-article archive snapshot points to unrelated content. The page is also missing material context — a defamation/SLAPP-style suit against a Forbes reporter, the 2023 arbitration order in Assofi, and any on-chain evidence — that would materially round out the entity's risk profile.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}