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 · TEXITcoin / MineTXC / Blockchain Mint
- Sequence
- #6
- Score
- 26 → 26 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 462168754
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T18:16:03.742Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T18:16:39.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T18:16:39.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 4Jsq4j4zCGpcav9ZHTebETbW4ERKLRanowLaeCZawnLF
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1751 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"5dcd8fe12ddbcb102ad70350001dbbc0","band_override":null,"blocked_count":2,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T18:16:03.386Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.1818,"investigation_id":"21466a18-b366-4bdf-a8f3-c17504df0fd2","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":26,"page_slug":"texitcoin-minetxc-blockchain-mint","prev_score":26,"reason":"The core allegations hold up: the Texas emergency order, the hearing date and length, the judge, Gray's relocation, the New Zealand warning and the Mulligan Mint bankruptcy were confirmed against regulator and news sources. Two of 11 countable claim findings (about 18%) were problem findings. claim_findings[4] is disputed because the timeline credits Texas Public Radio for the Quinn Emanuel motion and calls it a motion to dismiss, but that article does not name the firm and describes a request to decide the case without a full hearing. claim_findings[12] (the Disruption Banking figures) could not be verified. Two findings (claim_findings[5] and [10]) were blocked by the source and are excluded from the percentage, which is a coverage limit rather than a defect of the page. The final timeline entry cites a publication homepage and no source confirms the hearing concluded. The review found only a minor omission, no contradiction of the page by the subject's current status, and moderate reviewer confidence, so the penalty stays small.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":11,"sequence_num":6,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}