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 · Broox Bauer
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 26 → 26 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462053961
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T11:29:37.139Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T11:29:40.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T11:29:40.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- C8VCaNBfLt3hgzmMo5XT3Mon5gPeRFvDaw6qherdNGxr
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1594 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"c729f05d1189f09e8a4e9b07de7c2554","band_override":null,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T11:29:36.629Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.2857,"investigation_id":"b501a392-df51-40a0-8f74-d8c3e590bd81","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":26,"page_slug":"brooks-bauer","prev_score":26,"reason":"Of 7 claims checked, none were disputed and 2 could not be verified (claim_findings[2] and claim_findings[6]), giving about 29%, which falls in the minor-issues band. The main defects are the $59,800 and $109,000 trade figures, which do not appear in the DL News or Cryptonews.net articles cited for them (claim_findings[2]), and a $400,000 profit figure that neither CoinDesk nor DL News gives (claim_findings[1]). The 'Other alleged participants' section also carries a leftover editorial note about conflicting merged pages (claim_findings[3]). The core account (Bauer's role, the roughly 10-month duration, Axiom's response) matches Tier 1 and Tier 2 reporting and is consistently presented as allegation. The reviewer's confidence was low and its one unverifiable legal-status claim is a negative that cannot be confirmed, so the penalty is kept at the mild end of the band. No material omissions or contradicting subject status were reported.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}