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 · Baton Corporation (Pump.fun)
- Sequence
- #5
- Score
- 26 → 26 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 461970113
- Off-chain at
- 2026-10-27T06:32:15.991Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-10-27T06:32:28.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-10-27T06:32:28.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 3do8fKbz1wSxYVRG2daA8q2EUoh1CeS2p2uQq7XP31Bm
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1654 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"7044dda285bf00d5da8c1c4aeb75adda","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-10-27T06:32:15.713Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.4444,"investigation_id":"785471f1-d691-40c9-8791-b9e678a683e2","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":26,"page_slug":"baton-corporation-pump-fun","prev_score":26,"reason":"Of 10 claims reviewed, one was excluded because its source blocked the reviewer, and 4 of the remaining 9 (44%) were either disputed or could not be verified, which falls in the significant-issues band. The two disputed claims (claim_findings[5] and [6]) are one-day date errors in the Apple delisting section: the page's own source, Protos, puts the Custom Pairs launch on September 9 and the removal on September 10. The two unverifiable claims (claim_findings[7] and [9], the May 2024 exploit details and the WIRED report on Kerler) were not checked in this pass rather than found wrong. The core corporate facts, the FCA warning and the August 31, 2026 ruling were confirmed. Because the reviewer's confidence is low (0.5) and the disputed items are minor dates, the penalty is set at the mild end of the band. A high-priority coverage gap remains: the page should cite the court opinion directly and settle its 'pages differ' wording on RICO predicates.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":9,"sequence_num":5,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}