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 · Gurhan Kiziloz
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 4 → 0 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 444339408
- Off-chain at
- 2026-09-04T20:44:15.957Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Fo9PbGv9mfVP7D8hdhaYd9SncnUGKnPkCcEfTxpTM2jW
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1711 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"b3ab35d9e9368826218a7dd6c6470ba7","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-09-04T20:44:15.484Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.1538,"investigation_id":"10187fde-2ba3-4372-9a94-4cce683972dc","new_score":0,"page_slug":"gurhan-kiziloz","prev_score":4,"reason":"Using the reviewer's own formula (disputed + unverifiable) / total claims applied to the actual claim_findings array of 39 entries, disputed_pct is about 15% (3 disputed, 3 unverifiable), placing this page in the minor-issues band. All of the page's central allegations — Kiziloz's concealed role at BlockDAG, the presale fundraising discrepancies, the Seychelles regulatory warning, and the Brazilian Tether asset freeze and appeal — were independently confirmed. The disputed findings are all date errors in the secondary Lanistar and sponsorship-dispute material rather than errors in the core allegations: claim_findings[20] misdates the Inter Milan cease-and-desist by two months against the page's own cited source, and claim_findings[35] and [36] misdate the Lanistar landlord-petition dismissal and liquidation order by roughly one year and five months respectively, with [36] additionally citing a source that predates and does not discuss the event. A dead link on a live citation (claim_findings[38]) and an unresolved tension between two different on-chain fund totals (noted in coverage_gaps) further support a revise-and-correct rather than approve outcome, though none of this undermines the page's overall reliability.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}