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 · David Merino Quintana
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 3 → 3 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462038696
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T10:35:14.663Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T10:35:34.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T10:35:34.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- GJ3iCRRW7fbksqHPoVwGCth8ybXYJTF1bS4PHPR5kTMu
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1484 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"a92030e7355ab13ce5ef0487bc7d6551","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T10:35:14.429Z","decision":"review_approve","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0,"investigation_id":"99d5638f-7917-4b6d-b613-ec7c61da99b3","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":3,"page_slug":"david-merino-quintana","prev_score":3,"reason":"None of the 8 reviewed claims were disputed or unverifiable (0% disputed). The core facts hold: the $85M Miami-Dade judgment (claim_findings[0]), the August 2024 defaults (claim_findings[1]), the Spanish probe figures (claim_findings[5]) and the Dubai detention (claim_findings[4]). Three claims were only partially supported and merit wording fixes: the 30-year sentence request comes from a private prosecution, not Spanish prosecutors (claim_findings[3]); the Kerns suit is a Miami-Dade state case, not 'federal-court-adjacent' (claim_findings[2]); and the 2021 departure needs a better source (claim_findings[7]). The review found no material omissions and no conflict between the page and the subject's status, and the open coverage gaps (post-June 2026 extradition news, primary court records) are suggestions for expansion only.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}