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 · Dogwifhat (WIF)
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 38 → 38 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 423652974
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-01T19:11:51.168Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 6xNCqEMNGt3BuyfC3G5m1JKp2JTQ3iPSWEA7FqRqBM2N
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1175 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-01T19:11:51.026Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"88d7a7e4-688d-4c7e-870d-f0684e56ca8b","new_score":38,"page_slug":"dogwifhat","prev_score":38,"reason":"The reviewer found zero disputed claims across 31 total claim findings, with all major allegations — launch date, ATH price, Las Vegas Sphere fundraiser details, exchange listing dates, Binance monitoring/delisting actions, X account hack, and regulatory context — confirmed by Tier 1 or Tier 2 sources. Four claims are partially supported (claim_findings[18], [27], [30], [4]) due to minor temporal and numerical imprecision, none of which materially alter the page's risk characterization. Four claims are unverifiable (claim_findings[13], [15], [31], [33]) but all involve time-sensitive on-chain metrics or secondary price movements rather than core factual allegations. No link rot or stale critical citations were detected, and no coverage gaps carry high priority. Reviewer confidence of 0.82 supports a clear approve.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}