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 · SuperRare
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 52 → 52 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 425422178
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-09T22:53:27.789Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 9x1oBFh3r5MhbAXHzuDEz4dD7CE98HMHjyj52EvaeZdf
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1099 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-06-09T22:53:27.658Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"652caba3-c5e6-4c5c-adf2-31e2693beb1f","new_score":52,"page_slug":"superrare","prev_score":52,"reason":"The page's core factual claims about SuperRare's founding, the July 2025 RareStakingV1 exploit mechanics, investor roster, and token history are well-supported by multiple independent sources. Several secondary claims — particularly the exact RARE token price drop percentage (12%), the 41% vs 35% recovery figure, and the derivatives volume doubling — are drawn from lower-tier sources with minor internal inconsistencies. The CoinTelegraph article cited in the evidence returned a 404, and the 99bitcoins article returned HTTP 403, creating link rot for two of the most important post-hack sources. The page contains no official primary sources (SuperRare blog, on-chain data) for the reimbursement announcement, which is a significant evidentiary gap.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}