Skip to main content
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_revise · SuperRare
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#3
Score
5245 (-7)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
425422182
Off-chain at
2026-06-09T22:53:27.863Z
Anchored at
Block time

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
8gePJwZfRh4znUfrV9U6DtvUhY122fNpNTK2GNCYofGi
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1542 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-09T22:53:27.658Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"652caba3-c5e6-4c5c-adf2-31e2693beb1f","new_score":45,"page_slug":"superrare","prev_score":52,"reason":"The review confirmed all core claims about SuperRare's founding, the July 2025 RareStakingV1 exploit mechanics, the contract address, the $731,000 theft amount, and the investor roster (claim_findings[0] through claim_findings[4] all confirmed by Tier 1–2 sources). No claims were directly disputed. Seven claims are partially supported, but these involve precision issues rather than contradictions — the exact RARE token ATH price (claim_findings[10]: $3.79 vs $3.61 per CoinGecko), the recovery percentage (claim_findings[5]: 41% vs 35% depending on measurement window), and the derivatives volume doubling (claim_findings[18]: sourced only from AI-generated summaries). One claim is unverifiable (claim_findings[16]: PeckShield and Blockaid flagging), a minor corroboration detail. Link rot on the CoinTelegraph source (404) and HTTP 403 on the 99bitcoins article affects secondary post-hack response sourcing. Two high-priority coverage gaps — absence of on-chain transaction evidence and no official SuperRare primary statement for the reimbursement — should be addressed to bring the page to a higher evidentiary standard, but they represent expansion needs rather than factual errors.","score_delta":-7,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}