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 · Circle USYC
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 78 → 73 (-5)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443503983
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-03T16:45:33.083Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 2aX91TkH7WKpmvWkve1nntKHyxYS7gKgP1CLqfP2SGwE
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1326 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-03T16:45:32.774Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"a1ccc281-70f2-407f-852f-d7ffbe8daa27","new_score":73,"page_slug":"circle-usyc","prev_score":78,"reason":"The reviewer confirmed 10 of 13 claims outright, including the core corporate-structure, acquisition, eligibility-gating, and multi-chain-expansion facts (claim_findings[0]-[2], [4]-[7], [9], [11]), with no claims marked disputed. The reviewer's reported disputed_pct of 15.4% comes entirely from two negative/absence-of-evidence claims that the page itself already hedges appropriately (claim_findings[8] on missing attestation reports, claim_findings[12] on no located SEC action) and one partially-supported claim about USYC's price stability during the Usual/USD0++ episode, where the underlying causal attribution is confirmed but the specific detail rests on secondary analysis rather than primary on-chain data (claim_findings[10]). No link rot, staleness, or high-priority coverage gaps were identified. This pattern reflects a well-sourced page with soft edges rather than a substantively disputed one, warranting a light revision penalty rather than a heavier one.","score_delta":-5,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}