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 · Axiom Exchange
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 14 → 4 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 422984232
- Off-chain at
- 2026-05-29T17:31:33.652Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 7cSNT2yjEbDaT77wapcwuyTiX5wnQ4kUgipnZZVDUfJ3
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1270 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-05-29T17:31:33.519Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"7d9ea471-6a8b-4714-8f3b-088965af1f3c","new_score":4,"page_slug":"axiom-exchange","prev_score":14,"reason":"The core insider trading allegations are strongly confirmed across multiple Tier 1–2 sources (CoinDesk, DL News, Yahoo Finance, CryptoPotato), and the review found zero directly disputed claims. However, claim_findings[19] identifies a material factual error: the page states both founders attended UC San Diego, while multiple sources confirm Preston Ellis studied at UC Berkeley. Additionally, the entire User Complaints section (claim_findings[14–18]) rests solely on a Trustpilot source returning HTTP 403, leaving four quoted reviews unverifiable with no confirmed secondary support — these specific quotes should be removed or replaced with verifiable citations. Two high-priority coverage gaps (on-chain wallet evidence and regulatory/SDNY follow-up) and one test placeholder submission (8ca23ce8) that passed auto-approval indicate the page needs targeted corrections and expansion before it fully holds up.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}