Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-25T13:10:30.713Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"b89651d9-6f8d-4188-b5c8-6df51ee26616","new_score":22,"page_slug":"eclipse","prev_score":32,"reason":"Of the reviewer's 50 individually checked claims (the array itself, not the summary block's mismatched 55-claim total), 38 were confirmed and only 2 were disputed plus 4 unverifiable, for a disputed rate of 12% -- solidly within the 'minor issues' band. The two disputed claims are cosmetic rather than core: sections[2] names 'Apollo Global Management' as a strategic Series A contributor when the primary press release actually names 'Auros' in that role (an error a reader could not catch without checking the source themselves), and sections[3] presents a token-allocation breakdown that sums to 105% because two trackers' category schemas were merged (an error visible on its face, without needing to leave the page). Neither disputed claim touches the page's central allegations -- the founder-misconduct scandal, funding history, TVL collapse, and layoffs all held up. Two findings marked 'stale' (not counted toward disputed_pct, per the review methodology) show the page's TVL, volume, and market-cap figures were accurate for an early-2026 snapshot but have since been overtaken by a further ~99% collapse and an unmentioned mid-2026 pivot to a consumer product with a reported 100,000+ user base; this is a timeliness gap, not an authoring error, but it means the page currently understates the scale of decline while omitting a later, partly offsetting development, and two of the six coverage gaps flagging this and the tokenomics issue are marked high priority. The reviewer also affirmatively checked for and ruled out confusion with unrelated 'Eclipse' entities, a positive sign of care that offsets some of the above.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}