Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-27T03:22:42.847Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"0ffbfa7c-6f53-4b54-9379-116f5a65d8f5","new_score":10,"page_slug":"mantra-chain","prev_score":22,"reason":"The review's summary block reports 34 total claims but its claim_findings array contains only 22 entries; the missing 12 cannot be inspected, so we adjudicate on the verifiable array rather than the summary total. On that basis the disputed-or-unverifiable rate is about 18% (3 disputed + 1 unverifiable of 22), which still lands in the same decision band as the review's own reported 12% figure. The page's central claims about the August 2026 Cosmos EVM exploit, the chain halt, and the cross-chain KiiChain/TAC impact are thoroughly corroborated across independent sources (claim_findings[0], [3], [5]). Set against that, the review found the page understates its post-crash token burn by roughly half, apparently by substituting dollar-value figures for token counts (claim_findings[13]), and turns a narrower Glassnode finding into a blanket claim of no wrongdoing while omitting contemporaneous insider-selling allegations that were public at the time (claim_findings[12]) -- an omission that skews the page favorably toward the subject on a question that remained genuinely contested. Two high-priority coverage gaps -- the undisclosed March 2026 token rebrand/supply split and missing tokenomics/concentration history -- reinforce that revision, not approval, is warranted even though the disputed share of claims is modest.","score_delta":-12,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}