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_revise · Neutrl
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 45 → 33 (-12)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443525733
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-27T11:06:12.276Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- AVeDTXJeuLNxHeSBDmYoMouCth8Pe7pmbtSfr4cnZ3wE
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1885 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-27T11:06:11.567Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"929433df-9a9d-4af5-9512-099ea30a94c9","new_score":33,"page_slug":"neutrl","prev_score":45,"reason":"Independent verification supports the substance of this page: the $5M seed round, launch metrics, and the full March 2026 DNS-hijack narrative (claim_findings[3], [4], [5], [6]-[9], [11], [12], [13]) all check out against multiple outside sources. Two of fifteen claims were disputed — the USDX comparison event (claim_findings[10]), dated Nov 1, 2025 on the page versus Nov 3-7, 2025 in independent reporting, and the LayerZero integration date (claim_findings[14]), dated May 1, 2026 on the page versus roughly Nov 2025 per LayerZero's own announcement — giving a disputed rate of 13.3%, in the lower half of the minor-issues band, and both look like first-of-month placeholder dates rather than fabricated facts. However, the review also found that every section's content field is empty, so the page currently delivers no synthesized analysis despite scaffolding that implies coverage of counterparty risk and partnerships, and it flagged a high-priority gap around the total absence of any smart-contract-audit disclosure for a protocol that holds custodial reserves and runs OTC counterparty exposure. Those two high-priority gaps, plus an undated $136M TVL figure (claim_findings[2]) sitting against a metric that has since ranged from $89M to $217M, justify placing the penalty toward the upper end of the minor-issues range rather than the floor, while the disputed-claim rate itself keeps this in the revise band without triggering under-investigation status, which the review's own band table reserves for 30%+ disputed rates.","score_delta":-12,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}