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 · CoinW6
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 2 → 0 (-5)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443561696
- Off-chain at
- 2026-09-02T00:38:50.316Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 4UUhPesaiiaT2TWyPa7ja8Z6XYQJWwVX4FAjobFpNnNj
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2358 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"5cbeed5b30de8caf1cd62e9fffc34891","band_override":{"actual_delta":-5,"actual_verdict":"review_revise","disputed_pct":0,"expected_delta_range":[0,0],"expected_verdict":"review_approve","rationale":"The reviewer confirmed 19 of 21 claims directly against primary sources -- the SEC's complaint, litigation releases, and the court docket -- with zero disputed claims and a 0% disputed rate (summary.disputed_pct). One claim, that the bybit.cc domain was chosen specifically to mimic the Bybit exchange (claim_findings[9]), is only partially supported: the underlying fact that bybit.cc was one of CoinW6's domains is confirmed, but no cited source states the brand-mimicry rationale, making it an unstated editorial inference rather than an error. The page is not being downgraded for accuracy. It is asked for a light revision because the reviewer flagged a high-priority coverage gap (coverage_gaps[0]): the page does not address whether coinw6.com and its associated domains remain active or reachable in 2026, which is directly relevant to readers assessing ongoing risk."},"decided_at":"2026-09-02T00:38:50.128Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0,"investigation_id":"91f47d77-4169-4372-9d62-24cccdb2cab7","new_score":0,"page_slug":"coinw6","prev_score":2,"reason":"The reviewer confirmed 19 of 21 claims directly against primary sources -- the SEC's complaint, litigation releases, and the court docket -- with zero disputed claims and a 0% disputed rate (summary.disputed_pct). One claim, that the bybit.cc domain was chosen specifically to mimic the Bybit exchange (claim_findings[9]), is only partially supported: the underlying fact that bybit.cc was one of CoinW6's domains is confirmed, but no cited source states the brand-mimicry rationale, making it an unstated editorial inference rather than an error. The page is not being downgraded for accuracy. It is asked for a light revision because the reviewer flagged a high-priority coverage gap (coverage_gaps[0]): the page does not address whether coinw6.com and its associated domains remain active or reachable in 2026, which is directly relevant to readers assessing ongoing risk.","score_delta":-5,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}