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
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 2 → 0 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462279329
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-28T00:48:40.173Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-28T00:49:16.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-28T00:49:16.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- JCnQnM2K75RjncEifm97akTeVHsYCGb73hVmmJuRb8P7
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1539 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"d4e71380e5f1743e540d58d57982e78e","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-10-28T00:48:39.937Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.2143,"investigation_id":"f6d79088-9e78-4e18-9df0-4025f33d0c13","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":0,"page_slug":"ai-powered-deepfake-crypto-scam-infrastructure-2026-industrialization-wave","prev_score":2,"reason":"The core figures (Chainalysis $14-17B, 1,400% and 4.5x; TRM 54/100 and 263%; the DOJ April 23, 2026 action) were confirmed against sources (claim_findings[0-1, 3-4, 6]). Three of 14 claims (21%) could not be verified: the 'as of September 2026' state deepfake-law count is cited to an article dated February 2026, the EU Article 50 date rests on a US state tracker, and a reference to a 'submitter' has no matching submission (claim_findings[11-13]). Several partial findings also need correction, including unsupported IRS letter specifics, a timeline date that is the article date rather than the arrest date, and a loosely supported USDT claim (claim_findings[5, 7, 8]). No dispute touches the central allegations, the subject is still operating, and the one omission is minor, so a modest penalty and a minor-issues banner fit.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}