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 · Cosmos (ATOM)
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 54 → 54 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443515924
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T18:15:15.172Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 6GUGPUD16NaQMkr2utVfZkrbfPVYAx9P1kBHJZQNXYwn
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1127 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T18:15:15.066Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"11ac1ead-84f7-4d0f-8a52-15836cc5d6b8","new_score":54,"page_slug":"cosmos-atom","prev_score":54,"reason":"The page is a general profile of a major operating protocol that documents specific, well-sourced controversies (the North Korea-linked LSM incident, the October 2022 IBC vulnerability, ATOM 2.0's rejection, Proposal 848, and ICF transparency disputes) rather than presenting unfounded accusations; most claims checked out against primary or independent sources. However, one section contains a claim (a January 2024 proposal 'receiving ~95% support') that directly contradicts the on-chain record, which shows that proposal was rejected with only ~25% support, and the page's assertion that no SEC security classification exists for ATOM omits the well-documented 2023 SEC v. Binance designation. A minor date error also misplaces Peng Zhong's Ignite departure by several months.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}