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_revise · Mining Automatic / Zan Shaikh
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 2 → 0 (-5)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 461977486
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T06:58:16.865Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T06:58:37.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T06:58:37.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- DEcGBbEk9izpbB3ijSLwXcLVva8C74bjaD6tSzgvgrHT
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2469 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"bbbeb3c0c0c886a7fbc012cc4b1df5aa","band_override":{"actual_delta":-5,"actual_verdict":"review_revise","disputed_pct":0.0909,"expected_delta_range":[0,0],"expected_verdict":"review_approve","rationale":"The core SEC facts on this page (filing date, court, charges, $22M from 380+ investors, spending breakdown, consent terms) were confirmed against the SEC release and complaint. Counting the 11 findings the reviewer could check (claim_findings[6], the FBI page, was blocked and is excluded), 1 was unverifiable, about 9%, which alone would approve the page. The page is revised instead because of a high-priority coverage gap: claim_findings[8] names Hassan Shaikh, officer titles and four other businesses that appear in neither the complaint nor any checked source, and the reviewer recommends sourcing or removing them. Two smaller issues also need correcting: claim_findings[9] calls a fund-recovery promoter 'independent', and the page's status text is dated late July 2026 with no later court docket check."},"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T06:58:16.476Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.0909,"investigation_id":"a7f98568-8646-4556-82fb-4a735f303028","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":0,"page_slug":"mining-automatic-zan-shaikh","prev_score":2,"reason":"The core SEC facts on this page (filing date, court, charges, $22M from 380+ investors, spending breakdown, consent terms) were confirmed against the SEC release and complaint. Counting the 11 findings the reviewer could check (claim_findings[6], the FBI page, was blocked and is excluded), 1 was unverifiable, about 9%, which alone would approve the page. The page is revised instead because of a high-priority coverage gap: claim_findings[8] names Hassan Shaikh, officer titles and four other businesses that appear in neither the complaint nor any checked source, and the reviewer recommends sourcing or removing them. Two smaller issues also need correcting: claim_findings[9] calls a fund-recovery promoter 'independent', and the page's status text is dated late July 2026 with no later court docket check.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":-5,"scored_claims":11,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}