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 · Zero Network (Zerion L2)
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 38 → 28 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443517604
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T22:28:43.212Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 4a18DYjvFsCCZzVpBQv3hjhufbhzKPchrc7oRLEN6XXJ
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1756 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-25T22:28:42.895Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"4febd78d-1f92-43e6-84bc-943ea9e9a95e","new_score":28,"page_slug":"zero-network-zerion-l2","prev_score":38,"reason":"An independent fact-check confirmed 26 of the page's 33 checkable claims, including the network's November 2024 launch, the December 2025 outage, the May 2026 shutdown announcement, and the absence of a disclosed recovery mechanism after the July 31 deadline; the disputed-plus-unverifiable share works out to about 12%, in the minor-issues range. Two claims overstate causation: the page says the December outage is 'widely cited' as a factor in the shutdown, but no shutdown-coverage source reviewed draws that link (claim_findings[18]), and the page asserts the outage 'validated' a specific proposer-centralization risk 'in practice' when no source discloses the outage's actual root cause (claim_findings[23]) -- both read as the page's own inference presented as established fact, and both sit in sections the page itself marks high severity. A March 2024 timeline entry stating ZK Stack was announced then is contradicted by a contemporaneous report that Zerion explicitly declined to name its tech stack at that time (claim_findings[28]). Two TVL figures could not be verified because the source dashboard is JavaScript-rendered and inaccessible to the review's fetch tools -- a limitation of the review rather than a demonstrated page error (claim_findings[3], claim_findings[12]) -- and no coverage gap was rated high priority, so the page's overall scope and sourcing remain sound.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}