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.
- Sequence
- #2
- Score
- 12 → 12 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443513236
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-25T10:07:40.344Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- GdYkVsW1VPFQ7PR3GbSfkb1cYNV18gC1rMfKzVr7praT
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1462 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-08-25T10:07:40.087Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"d73d1c8a-6a8f-4c6f-b4e8-e6e6809b2fe8","new_score":12,"page_slug":"bitmart-exchange-insolvency-claims-and-frozen-withdrawals-august-2026","prev_score":12,"reason":"The large majority of the page's claims -- including the withdrawal-freeze reports, on-chain drawdown figures, named allegations, direct quotations, and historical 2021 hack/FTC background -- were independently corroborated against reputable sources and, where checked, direct quotations matched the cited reporting closely. The page appropriately distinguishes allegation from confirmed fact throughout (e.g., repeatedly noting insolvency is 'alleged but not independently confirmed'). The most significant issues found are: (1) a twice-repeated superlative claiming BitMart is uniquely facing insolvency allegations among three July 2026 exchange closures, which is disputed by comparable contemporaneous reporting on AscendEX; (2) the page's closure-timeline framing is now stale, since BitMart announced on August 21, 2026 (before today) that it is exploring restructuring with insolvency counsel rather than proceeding with the fixed wind-down described; and (3) several minor date-precision errors in the timeline and one weak/vendor-sourced citation.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":2,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}