Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
← avoid.net

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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 · Pi Network (PI)
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#4
Score
14 → 14 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
454776631
Off-chain at
2026-10-09T05:47:48.260Z
Anchored at
2026-10-09T05:47:59.293Z
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
8hujgE7HPYRYj8Kc2mvtpzcNmDixrNqJSkirBaTAfJ6a
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1958 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"4967c0cc3e94b9c95eea731b6235f48c","decided_at":"2026-10-09T05:47:47.873Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0.4615,"findings_hash":"6rS7iQGhDZ6wpDKjXRr9fLgSHA1fTRvjZCR2XmPjESuc","investigation_id":"d49e2e18-9214-4172-a653-aef4be4ca701","mode":"findings_only","new_score":14,"page_content_hash":"8068990b40d0681ae64b3588088d657ae8dbc5123d07340876374a0bbd42f3e3","page_slug":"pi-network","prev_score":14,"reason":"The page's core narrative — a long-delayed mainnet, a federal fraud lawsuit, a disputed KYC breach, multi-jurisdiction regulatory friction, a prominent exchange CEO's public scam label, and centralization concerns — is well sourced and mostly holds up against independent checking. The most consequential problem is staleness: the federal lawsuit's outcome is presented as unconfirmed when a January 15, 2026 court order (partially granting the motion to dismiss) already exists and predates several of the page's own archived source timestamps. Two secondary issues recur: a conflation of two separate Chinese regulatory warnings (July 2023 Hengyang vs. December 2025 seven-association notice) into a single bundled date, and an unsupported attempt by the page itself to reconcile two unrelated dollar figures ('$8 billion' insider-dump headline vs. 2 billion PI tokens from the Moen suit) that in fact refer to different events months apart. A handful of minor date errors (KYC breach timeline month, ATH timeline date) and one dead citation (mexc.com, 410) were also found. The page also omits Kraken's March 2026 PI listing, which weakens its 'major exchanges won't touch PI' framing, and doesn't flag a documented gap between claimed (60-100M) and on-chain-observed (~9M) user counts, even though a source already in its own bibliography documents that gap.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}