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_approve · Circle
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 48 → 62 (+14)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 426514834
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-14T23:16:16.244Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Dq7Qx3Z5nNFRX7sAAXmFR87279PEmXVYLexrWbeVgtP3
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1678 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:16.140Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"85d9f9dd-474a-4cb3-b2e5-3abcdd7ccf2f","new_score":62,"page_slug":"circle","prev_score":48,"reason":"This was a severity-calibration review, not a content dispute. All six claim findings (claim_findings[0]–[5]) are supported, with a disputed_pct of 0%. Circle Internet Group is a NYSE-listed, OCC conditionally chartered, GENIUS Act-regulated stablecoin issuer publishing monthly Deloitte-attested reserve disclosures. The three incidents driving the current WARNING score (48) are third-party-abuse events: the SVB depeg was suffered by Circle due to an external bank failure with full recovery (claim_findings[3]); the Drift Protocol exploit was a DPRK hack of a third-party DeFi protocol where Circle's only role was declining to voluntarily freeze absent a court order (claim_findings[1]); and ZachXBT's $420M framing is a policy criticism, not a fraud finding or regulatory action against Circle (claim_findings[2]). The WARNING band (20–49) is calibrated for elevated fraud or unresolved severe operator-caused incidents, which do not apply here. Moving to CAUTIONARY (score 62) is appropriate: Circle's freeze-policy controversy and historical depeg event are genuine material caveats that preclude a VERIFIED band, but they do not warrant a warning implying operator fraud or elevated loss risk. Score delta of +14 is applied as recommended by the reviewer (confidence 0.88). Page content is accurate and remains published.","score_delta":14,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}