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 · Shuffle (shuffle.com)
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 38 → 38 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443513180
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T10:04:01.319Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 4jb7pGkmopYbJQALJrmRiDmF6HVTDydhCNBbSy8tWDFL
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1314 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T10:04:01.009Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"abe68948-0c6d-437a-9c8a-629b64c141cd","new_score":38,"page_slug":"shuffle-shuffle-com","prev_score":38,"reason":"The large majority of the page's claims about Shuffle's corporate background, licensing, the October 2025 Fast Track data breach, and the August 2026 ZachXBT/Milanovich allegations are independently corroborated by multiple credible sources and, in several cases, directly quoted language in cited articles. The withdrawal-complaints section contains one clearly disputed claim, where the cited AskGamblers complaint's actual dollar amount (3,000 USDC + 14 SOL) and date (circa mid/late 2025) do not match the page's stated figures ($20,000, July 31, 2026); this undermines the evidentiary basis for that section's flagship example even though the broader withdrawal-complaint pattern is independently supported by other genuine complaints. Several negative existence claims about the absence of regulatory enforcement action were left as unverifiable rather than confirmed, since a clean record cannot be proven with certainty from available search coverage.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}