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 · PlayDapp
- Sequence
- #3
- Score
- 22 → 12 (-10)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 443520450
- Off-chain at
- 2026-08-26T11:17:43.442Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- Cdr8Q76ga6dgGsxokPGaG2YPtzUUQAXQGCYrDTErFuGo
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1359 chars)
{"actor":"judge","decided_at":"2026-08-26T11:17:43.281Z","decision":"review_revise","investigation_id":"90804b6a-5edb-4b8e-86e6-1fe06e92c10a","new_score":12,"page_slug":"playdapp","prev_score":22,"reason":"Independent fact-checking confirmed 18 of this page's 20 factual claims, including an accurate distinction between the $290 million nominal mint value and any realized loss (claim_findings[5]), and found zero disputed claims (disputed_pct = 5%, within the approve range on raw numbers alone). However, three high-priority coverage gaps push this into revision territory: the page's 'Alleged Lazarus Group Attribution' section is backed by a citation that never mentions PlayDapp at all, while the only genuinely relevant reporting found (BleepingComputer) states the attack has not been attributed to a known group; all six page sections carry headings, severities, and sourced citations but zero body text; and the narrative stops in August 2024, omitting PlayDapp's 2025 delistings from Crypto.com and Binance that are material to the token's current status. None of this reflects false statements on the page as written, but the gaps are substantive enough to warrant revision rather than a clean approval.","score_delta":-10,"sequence_num":3,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}