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 · Polkadot
- Sequence
- #7
- Score
- 43 → 58 (+15)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 426514754
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-14T23:16:12.654Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 8CF1wdtuP6eg3MhUDpPd8vZUgAnrNVYPbfzhoVsyv6i
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1500 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:12.557Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","new_score":58,"page_slug":"polkadot","prev_score":43,"reason":"This is a severity-calibration review, not a content dispute. All six claim findings (indices 0–5) are supported with 0% disputed content — the page factual record stands. The reviewer (confidence 0.82) finds the current WARNING-band score of 43 is over-penalized because the two primary loss events are misattributed: the Hyperbridge exploit (claim_findings[1]) targeted a third-party bridge contract and left the Polkadot mainnet unaffected, and the 2017 Parity wallet freeze (claim_findings[2]) was developer negligence by a third-party library, not intentional fraud. Additionally, the treasury '2-year depletion' framing (claim_findings[4]) is contradicted by subsequent reporting confirming roughly 10 years of reserves under the current inflation model. Real material caveats — steep ecosystem contraction, severe price decline, and leadership instability — appropriately place Polkadot in the CAUTIONARY band (50–69). A score of 58 accurately reflects a legitimate but struggling platform with governance risks and no fraud history. The +15 point delta moves the score from WARNING (43) to CAUTIONARY (58) without altering publication status.","score_delta":15,"sequence_num":7,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}