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 · Ice Open Network (ICE)
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 22 → 2 (-20)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 465099035
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-04T00:24:01.962Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-04T00:24:03.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-04T00:24:03.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Ep4RyTmiohaFGiDBnz9dHS7iCTRf1qTSWR7FvJwbzREP
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1799 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"3ca79d858db35fdf919fad8d1f66d7f1","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-11-04T00:24:01.646Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.5714,"investigation_id":"f1ee641d-d100-4e31-a7aa-691e283f9cdf","judge_def_hash":"750934ecb48272224909b7430fab271676d391380fbc821acbe7ee7e4cac2fa3","new_score":2,"page_slug":"ice","prev_score":22,"reason":"Of 7 checked claims, 1 was disputed and 3 could not be verified in the cited source (4 of 7, about 57%), which falls in the significant-issues band. claim_findings[0] is disputed: the cited Krebs article says Florea did not respond and the departure statement came from a company spokesperson, yet the page attributes an acknowledgment to Florea himself, a living person. claim_findings[2] and [3] (the ION price collapse and the Online.io OIO figures) are not in the cited article, and claim_findings[6] is an uncited negative claim. The reviewer's confidence is moderate (0.55) and most of the page was not checked, so the penalty sits in the lower half of the band and the verdict stays at revise rather than deny. The founder background from Krebs (claim_findings[1]) and the CEO cost figures (claim_findings[4]) held up.","reviewer_def_hash":"3839668b232611e5b26db72079d64745f8e57e919b8a379e79b44ba4a52c845b","score_delta":-20,"sequence_num":3,"severity_override":{"applied":true,"band":"significant","from_band":"significant","reason":"The review reports a material omission (KuCoin delisted ICE on 2025-12-15, relevant to holder exit liquidity) that the page does not mention. The percentage band is already significant, so the band is held at significant rather than raised."},"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}