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 · Grass
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 58 → 48 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 423639887
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-01T17:45:20.074Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- AQDJ8Uvq5fxFFdTmP5eqSCc1dgxaDEJUAnDSbK1cgEeY
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1256 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-01T17:45:19.923Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"15fb8058-c157-4461-9cda-ebfef760c364","new_score":48,"page_slug":"grass","prev_score":58,"reason":"The review confirmed 20 of 32 claims and found strong structural accuracy across team credentials, tokenomics, airdrop mechanics, and corporate structure. However, claim_findings[16] — the date of the $10M bridge round — is disputed by Tier 1 sources (Blockworks exclusive): the page places this event in March–April 2025 when all primary sources consistently record October 2025, a six-month error that propagates through the summary, sections[3], and timeline[9]. Three claims are stale (the 94% token decline figure, the Season 2 H1 2026 distribution window, and the Trustpilot 3.6/5 rating), and two high-priority coverage gaps remain open: on-chain verification of investor/team unlock behaviour and absence of independent revenue verification for the self-reported $4.3M Q3 and $12.8M Q4 2025 figures. These issues collectively warrant revision but do not undermine the investigation's core conclusions.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}