Verify a decision

{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-26T07:07:33.126Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"83dae395-6719-4cb4-b5fc-4a2b875617e0","new_score":0,"page_slug":"q2-2026-bridge-exploit-wave","prev_score":0,"reason":"An independent fact-check confirmed the large majority of this page's incident-level facts -- amounts, dates, and attack mechanisms for the Drift, KelpDAO, Hyperbridge, THORChain, Verus, Syscoin, and Taiko exploits -- against primary incident reports and multiple independent outlets (26 of 37 claims fully confirmed, disputed share 5/37 = 13.5%). The review did find a real error in how the page frames its aggregate bridge-loss statistics: the claim that Drift and KelpDAO together made up 'over 76% of bridge-related losses' (claim_findings[4]) mixes up two different denominators and appears to include Drift, which the cited sources classify outside the bridge-exploit category, and a recurring '$340 million cumulative bridge losses' figure used in the summary and Syscoin sections (claim_findings[0], claim_findings[30]) does not match the sum of the page's own six itemized incidents (~$328.5M) and conflates a Q2-specific total with a separate full-year statistic. These are framing and arithmetic errors in the page's own self-generated statistics rather than misstatements about what happened in each individual incident, so the page needs correction of its aggregate figures rather than removal or a credibility downgrade of its underlying reporting.","score_delta":-12,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}