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 · Austin Fine (@xmrfine)
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 45 → 45 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462180022
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T18:56:04.761Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T18:56:29.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T18:56:29.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 7GDhScCN6sjt95cPsVJBjciA2yYKHwKnQAtkhxdPtr3C
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1501 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"5138537e8e7b7cf3fdbebb9dd4984125","band_override":null,"blocked_count":2,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T18:56:04.502Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.4545,"investigation_id":"893561e2-5033-4984-b37d-3bb28a38a681","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":45,"page_slug":"austin-fine-xmrfine","prev_score":45,"reason":"Of 11 scoreable claim findings (2 were excluded because the DOJ source blocked the reviewer), 3 were disputed and 2 could not be verified, giving about 45%, the significant-issues band. The core allegation, that ZachXBT accused Fine of laundering stolen funds via Monero, is supported by Tier 2 reporting (claim_findings[0], [3], [8]). The disputes are narrow: the unsupported 'Beverly Hills' location for TBTFW appears twice (claim_findings[1], [2], one defect group) and the theft date 2024-08-01 should likely be 2024-08-18 (claim_findings[4]). Because the disputed items are minor details and reviewer confidence is moderate (0.55), the penalty is set at the mild end of the band. A high-priority coverage gap remains: all Fine-specific claims rest on aggregator reports rather than ZachXBT's original post.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":11,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}