Skip to main content
AVOID.NET
Sign in
← avoid.net

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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 · Polymarket
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#4
Score
22 → 22 (0)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
449569179
Off-chain at
2026-09-23T02:35:20.061Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
8zJZB1DWS7HeSwtCfCByUWerBkyWKhsTL9CVNhjoDeTu
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2023 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","artifact_identity":"b6974ee82d6b2318954efc0c0e5e03c7","decided_at":"2026-09-23T02:35:19.883Z","decision":"review","disputed_pct":0,"findings_hash":"55Y3iDSVQQYph9bjM5A55yyXkkJgtrtAvngHUoD4wBh9","investigation_id":"e79a082e-deb8-4d91-88ce-d964801aaebf","new_score":22,"page_content_hash":"a0bd7f8181869c3c21cd75fca5547cbb66b7989be6cc6e45421c557b9a924a68","page_slug":"polymarket","prev_score":22,"reason":"The page is unusually well sourced for a fast-moving, multi-incident investigation, and every major claim I checked against independent tier-1/tier-2 reporting — the 2022 CFTC settlement, the QCEX acquisition and November 2025 DCM designation, the September 2026 disclosure of three CFTC insider-trading probes, the Bloomberg/Polysights $200M analysis, the Van Dyke criminal case, the UMA oracle controversies (Ukraine whale and Barron Trump/DJT override), the Connecticut cease-and-desist, the Baltimore lawsuit, the NACA influencer suit, the 2024 wash-trading research, the France ISP block, and the 1789 Capital/ICE funding figures — held up as stated. The one notable defect is a sourcing-attribution issue in the CFTC insider-trading-probes section, which credits 'CCN and other outlets' for the FOIA disclosure while omitting WIRED, the outlet that actually filed the FOIA request and broke the story; this does not affect the underlying facts but should be corrected for proper attribution. Separately, five of the six accepted_submissions are clearly test/fixture data (placeholder 'rep fixture N' claims and a fake sec.gov URL) rather than real evidence, and should not be treated as substantive support for any claim; only the CFTC press-release submission is genuine. Coverage gaps exist around reconciling the closed founder-level DOJ/CFTC probe with the newer trader-level probes, smart-contract audit history, and Polymarket's revenue model.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}