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 · Fuse Wallet
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 74 → 64 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 423648371
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-01T18:41:19.809Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 3mmTW4BX5CKNXJzpsEWx3VJGD9EzRXGPzHQfgauhHye3
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1215 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-01T18:41:19.371Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"bd035130-4c3b-41dc-a547-fc8fe9fda8fc","new_score":64,"page_slug":"fuse-wallet","prev_score":74,"reason":"The review found 2 disputed claims out of 24 (12.5%), placing this page in the minor-issues band. Both disputed claims concern the total funding figure: the page states $40.9 million in the summary and at timeline[8], while the page's own cited primary source (PR Newswire, Tier 1) explicitly states $42.9 million — a $2 million undercount confirmed by The Block. Separately, the page contains an internal contradiction on the App Store launch date: the section text and timeline[6] cite December 23, 2025 while timeline[5] correctly cites March 19, 2025, which is corroborated by independent sources. Both high-priority coverage gaps require editorial correction before the page accurately represents the public record. No fraud, security failures, or core trust allegations are in dispute; the underlying product description and audit records are well-sourced.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}