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 · OlympusDAO
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 28 → 18 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443520325
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-26T11:13:33.928Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- zhJRG1tqKEwJodh7HAsgF9dqKPjX2i13ZpcA1Q13WK3
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1286 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-26T11:13:33.728Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"d4a96a3a-5e0d-4789-85c3-1d88ae66379d","new_score":18,"page_slug":"olympusdao","prev_score":28,"reason":"The review's disputed_pct is 9.52% (1 disputed + 1 unverifiable of 21 claims), which sits just under the 10% approval threshold, but a high-priority coverage gap independently justifies moving this page to revise rather than approve. claim_findings[1] shows the page's own summary conflates market capitalization ($4.4B) with treasury TVL, contradicting the ~$866M peak TVL figure in the page's own cited DeFiLlama data and its own timeline entry. claim_findings[6] and claim_findings[17] show the page's claim of ongoing, unresolved litigation cannot be verified and appears to mischaracterize a 2023 lawsuit as a continuation of a 2022 case that had actually been voluntarily dismissed months earlier. Separately, a high-priority coverage gap notes the page omits the April 2022 Rari Capital/Fuse hack (~$80M), a larger incident that directly hit OlympusDAO's own treasury pool, which is a material omission for a risk-profile page.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}