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 · Treasure DAO
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 42 → 34 (-8)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 423875960
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-02T19:48:28.510Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Hc4snhG3cy6vXFMoWYfTY5wavNskVMBQc22hpHxrkhKJ
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1653 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-02T19:48:28.356Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"3237b462-d3c5-42b9-9b44-d2611221db93","new_score":34,"page_slug":"treasure-dao","prev_score":42,"reason":"The page is substantially accurate — 18 of 24 claims confirmed, one disputed, four partially supported — keeping the computed disputed rate at 8%. However, two issues require correction before approval. First, claim_findings[13] mischaracterizes the Q4 2024 financial figures: the page labels $11.3 million as 'quarterly expenses,' but the official Treasure DAO Q4 2024 Financial Transparency Report documents $4.26 million in operating expenses; the $11.3 million figure represents a quarterly net loss that includes a large non-cash MAGIC token impairment charge, not operational spending. This mischaracterization appears in a high-severity section and should be corrected to avoid materially misleading readers on the scale of the project's cost structure. Second, claim_findings[22] (timeline[1]) disputes the $3 million funding round date: the page assigns it to 2022-01-01, but BeInCrypto and CypherHunter both confirm the round closed December 23, 2021 — a factual error the timeline entry's own cited source does not support as written. The omission of co-founder Gaarp (claim_findings[0]) is a coverage gap rather than a disputed fact but represents a material incompleteness in the founding narrative. A high-priority coverage gap on on-chain MAGIC token analysis also remains unaddressed.","score_delta":-8,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}