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 · Web3Port
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 5 → 5 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443561570
- Off-chain at
- 2026-09-02T00:38:48.196Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- HR26MNzWpFd9CYTRaSoMDf18qThcbHnf6ktGxLxNJi8m
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1599 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"03c657dad9ed7233774e42eae699e58d","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-09-02T00:38:47.924Z","decision":"review_approve","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0,"investigation_id":"987d9530-9591-480a-943c-b6d7da493ab1","new_score":5,"page_slug":"web3port","prev_score":5,"reason":"The reviewer checked 17 factual claims against independent sourcing and found 14 fully confirmed and 3 only partially supported, with zero claims disputed (disputed_pct 0%). The partial-support findings are minor: claim_findings[1] flags that the page's summary sentence slightly overstates Binance's role in identifying the banned market maker as Web3Port, when Binance itself never confirmed this and the page's body text hedges correctly; claim_findings[14] flags a single misnamed creditor (Delaware Division of Corporations, not 'Division of Revenue') in the bankruptcy section, with all dollar figures and counts otherwise exact. No claim was found disputed, stale, or affected by link rot, and every unverifiable-attribution claim (e.g., the Web3Port/Whisper incubation model, the Web3Port identity behind various market-maker bans) is already properly hedged on the page as third-party allegation rather than adjudicated fact. Coverage gaps identified (on-chain wallet forensics, primary corporate registry documents) are rated medium/low priority and represent opportunities for expansion, not grounds for revision or denial.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}