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 · TexCat
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 18 → 0 (-22)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 461769366
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-26T18:40:31.646Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-26T18:40:59.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-26T18:40:59.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- d898C3Tno8nPAkyEXBn1wQdqufpjpaVtobP5cAWTBrg
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2104 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"115c1cd2cf56da7747505deed4a73b7a","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-10-26T18:40:31.405Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.3333,"investigation_id":"7a9e565d-b19d-4921-9eed-3ebdf264b9cd","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":0,"page_slug":"texcat","prev_score":18,"reason":"Of 10 claim findings, 1 was unverifiable because the source blocked the reviewer (Blockspot, claim_findings[7]) and is excluded, leaving 3 disputed out of 9 (about 33%), which falls in the significant band. The disputed items are the page's central conclusion: claim_findings[3] and [9] say there is no recent trading, but that rests on a DEXTools URL that uses the token mint as the pair id, and claim_findings[4] lists the official token's own pair (CzcF...) as a separate conflicting contract. The review also reports a material omission, that this pair shows trading and liquidity with unreliable price data. Descriptions of the site, the DEXTools stub-page figures, the second pair and the absence of regulatory records were confirmed or partly supported, and no shutdown or sanction was found, so the page needs correction rather than delisting.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":-22,"score_limit":{"applied":-22,"limited":false,"proposed":-22,"rule":"second_opinion_agreed","second":-22},"scored_claims":9,"sequence_num":2,"severity_override":{"applied":true,"band":"significant","from_band":"significant","reason":"The review reports a material omission (the pair linked from texcat.fun shows about $44k 24h volume and $38k liquidity, which the page leaves out). The percentage band is already significant, so the omission confirms that band and rules out a lower one. The verdict was not pushed to deny because the omission is not a shutdown or sanction and the reviewer confidence is 0.7."},"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}