Skip to main content
Sign in
← avoid.net

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

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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_approve · Ethereum Classic
View on Solana ↗
Sequence
#3
Score
42 → 58 (+16)
Cluster
mainnet-beta
Slot
426514703
Off-chain at
2026-06-14T23:16:10.030Z
Anchored at
—
Block time
—

Independent verification

1. Database (off-chain)
9kFzs5PeZ9HJ9p7QHQBrosZ8YH4td5UBXAR7foqpSSEj
2. Recomputed (your browser)
computing…
3. On-chain (Solana memo)
fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1888 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:09.909Z","decision":"review_approve","investigation_id":"2ae2325a-238e-4228-b183-6f8ca733d750","new_score":58,"page_slug":"ethereum-classic","prev_score":42,"reason":"This is a severity-calibration review, not a content dispute. All seven claim_findings (indices 0-6) are marked 'supported' and disputed_pct is 0% — the page content stands. The current WARNING-band score of 42 is demonstrably miscalibrated: the band requires either 'elevated fraud/loss risk' or 'unresolved severe incident,' and neither condition holds. The 51% attacks of 2019 and 2020 were perpetrated by external actors against ETC (claim_findings[0]); Ethereum Classic was the victim, not the perpetrator. Post-Merge hashrate has risen approximately 7-8x, making the attack economics prohibitive and the incidents resolved (claim_findings[1]). There is no fraud, Ponzi mechanics, or exit scam in ETC's history (claim_findings[4]). Material caveats that justify a CAUTIONARY rating rather than a clean pass remain valid: the TVL is extremely minimal (~$74.6K, claim_findings[5]), governance contention around the Olympia upgrade is current and unresolved (claim_findings[6]), and no explicit SEC/CFTC classification exists. Two minor factual stale values — hashrate stated as '300+ TH/s' vs. current ~165-198 TH/s (claim_findings[2]) and TVL stated as '~$150K' vs. actual ~$74.6K (claim_findings[5]) — do not affect the band direction. A score of 58/CAUTIONARY correctly reflects a legitimate, long-running blockchain with structural caveats, without penalizing it for being the victim of attacks that have since been substantially defended against. The +16 delta moves the score from 42 to 58 as recommended by the reviewer.","score_delta":16,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}