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 · Adam Iza
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 457983981
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-17T09:17:40.042Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-17T09:18:02.150Z
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- EdeCCF1z5N4Nq5iBLrYwUePRaMWG8x5J9kW24qXRLwhT
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2254 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"5be1d92080e2820f89bf0f33113ce491","decided_at":"2026-10-17T09:17:39.890Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.1563,"findings_hash":"E4r6GGE58Hr1CdtExzNKQStpXTdVu8SWxKWNBASqJuCy","investigation_id":"e6a552fd-77b7-4147-a3c5-bddbb3b71daf","mode":"findings_only","new_score":0,"page_content_hash":"b0022250c9c0144c6107eab95a26a8314f40bf0483b9a532d9f9138d26c6b476","page_slug":"adam-iza","prev_score":0,"reason":"The page's core factual architecture — the Meta Platforms ad-fraud scheme, the LASD deputy bribery/extortion operation, the January 2025 California guilty plea, and the Connecticut kidnapping plot tied to the $245 million Bitcoin theft — is well supported by DOJ, IRS, and multiple credible news sources, and the vast majority of dates, names, dollar figures, and plea details I checked matched independent reporting closely. However, the page is now meaningfully out of date on outcomes that have occurred since it was drafted: Iza has actually been sentenced in both the Connecticut case (Sept 2026, 15 years, exceeding the 14-year floor the page still describes as merely sought) and the California case (Oct 2026, 78 months + $23.4M restitution, where the page still presents the sentencing date as unresolved); co-defendant Saif Faiq has pleaded guilty despite the page stating he 'pleaded not guilty'; and deputies Rodriguez and Cadman have since been sentenced, which the page does not reflect (and for Cadman, the page even contradicts itself between sections about whether he had entered a plea). One specific sub-claim — that the July 2022 Rodriguez GPS warrant's coordinates were shared with 'Iza's associates' — is directly contradicted by the DOJ's own sentencing release, which attributes that particular warrant to an unrelated private client in a divorce matter. A handful of granular claims (deputy hometowns beyond Cadman's confirmed Fullerton, the 'Dream' entity's $4.1M transfer, and the 'L.A.'/'Chapell' extortion details) could not be independently verified from the sources I could access and are flagged unverifiable rather than disputed.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}