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 · PeopleDAO
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 42 → 42 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443509264
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-19T04:00:08.881Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Fodyfdg8V3gQH7RsUbQ4XjnCucegtCjkWAS53Py1Q684
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1072 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-19T04:00:08.702Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"28b0aaa9-98f7-4552-b0ea-b8e96024fc77","new_score":42,"page_slug":"peopledao","prev_score":42,"reason":"All ConstitutionDAO/PeopleDAO formation facts and hack details (amount, method, date, exchange destinations, and cooperative post-incident response) were independently confirmed against multiple primary and secondary sources with no contradictions. The page correctly frames PeopleDAO as the victim of an external attacker rather than a perpetrator, and does not use unhedged fraud language. The only defect found is a minor date/context error on the KuCoin delisting timeline entry (off by ~2 weeks, and presented without noting it was a routine multi-token action). The larger limitation is structural: the section bodies delivered to this review were empty, so roughly half the page's actual prose could not be fact-checked.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}