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 · Shunda Park Scam Compound
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 0 → 0 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 426250560
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-13T18:10:31.388Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- GaEA36nJzxXXv2HCHSbWAzJWVH4Sv83EpYmQh5HsSfXK
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1228 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-06-13T18:10:31.282Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"0385a599-d12e-48f2-9567-9aa6787f27ce","new_score":0,"page_slug":"shunda-park-scam-compound","prev_score":0,"reason":"The Shunda Park investigation page is well-sourced and factually accurate across all major claims. All primary assertions — the defendants' names and roles, the DOJ charges, the KNU seizure date and statistics, the OFAC designations, the Strike Force operational numbers, and the IC3 loss figures — are confirmed by Tier 1 or Tier 2 sources. The three partially-supported findings are minor: the description of the defendants' arrest as 'while traveling' omits that they were en route back to Burma; one cited Irrawaddy URL has a headline referencing '900 Foreigners' (the group who refused evacuation) rather than the 1,307 who were evacuated, which could cause source confusion; and one timeline entry attributes May 5 to reporting that was published May 4. No claims were found to be disputed or unverifiable; no link rot was detected in the primary sources checked.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}