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_approve · SushiSwap
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 32 → 32 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 426276972
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-13T21:05:07.421Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- D8JGMitKYCoXCzKvr9LQgnMxSKv9pSZuXuJBqxKY7BTh
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1191 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-13T21:05:07.185Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"df79decd-dab0-46e7-a234-b7db05d89ce2","new_score":32,"page_slug":"sushiswap","prev_score":32,"reason":"The reviewer examined 26 claims and found zero disputed. Sixteen claims were fully confirmed by Tier 1 sources; eight were partially supported due to minor inaccuracies — notably the launch date listed as August 1 vs. the confirmed August 28 (claim_findings[9]), the Jared Grey appointment date off by approximately eight days (claim_findings[16]), and the treasury figure at the high end of a reported range (claim_findings[20]). None of the partially supported findings contradict core allegations about Chef Nomi's withdrawal, the SEC subpoena, the 2023 exploit, or governance centralization — all of which are confirmed. Two high-priority coverage gaps remain (on-chain transaction citations and SEC subpoena outcome tracking), but per review policy, coverage gaps indicate areas for expansion rather than grounds for denial or revision.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}