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 · Movement Labs
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 8 → 8 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443515288
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T14:20:24.935Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- BrP6zhJ1tb93uR6oTmMrp1mNQbLtffRkGBHA27PGLopE
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1675 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T14:20:24.316Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"55d1fe32-a031-48d1-80d0-26dae07d87a5","new_score":8,"page_slug":"movement-labs","prev_score":8,"reason":"The great majority of the page's claims — the funding history, the Rentech/Web3Port contract chronology and quotes, the token dump mechanics, the leadership overhaul, the Delaware Chancery advancement litigation, and the bankruptcy filing's headline figures — are independently confirmed against primary or credible secondary sources, including several primary documents (PR Newswire releases, Coinbase's own statements, a Delaware Chancery case summary). Four claims are disputed: two reflect fabricated citation attributions (a creditors'-meeting date and a proof-of-claim deadline both cited to a crypto.news article that does not contain them, though the underlying dates are independently verifiable elsewhere), one misnames a bankruptcy creditor (Delaware 'Division of Revenue' vs. the correct 'Division of Corporations,' contradicting the page's own cited source), and one conflates the December 2024 token dump with a Binance account ban that in fact occurred roughly three months later. The page's headline statistic that MOVE 'lost over 94% of its peak value' is technically not false but materially understates the true ~99% decline from the token's all-time high, and the page omits a significant, well-documented related scandal (undisclosed adviser token allocations, including a $50M dispute involving Thapaliya).","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}