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 · Polkadot
- Sequence
- #6
- Score
- 43 → 43 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 426514751
- Off-chain at
- 2026-06-14T23:16:12.609Z
- Anchored at
- —
- Block time
- —
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- JAD35RDMH9dhXSheXT63XuEx3FK7T4WXxSXZKWQaVA4t
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (2089 chars)
{"actor":"reviewer","decided_at":"2026-06-14T23:16:12.557Z","decision":"review","investigation_id":"ab48864f-0340-45d5-ad56-54f4f7e19f52","new_score":43,"page_slug":"polkadot","prev_score":43,"reason":"Blue-chip calibration review (Prompt A). Verdict: over-penalized. Page content is treated as accurate; the trust_score band is miscalibrated. Polkadot (DOT) is a major, legitimate Layer-0 blockchain infrastructure project founded by Gavin Wood (Ethereum co-founder) that has been publicly traded since 2020, has active SEC ETF applications on file, and has never faced fraud convictions, exit scam allegations, or Ponzi mechanics. The current WARNING band (score 43) is over-penalized under the post-policy band semantics, which reserve WARNING (20-49) for 'elevated fraud/loss risk or unresolved severe incident.' The primary incidents driving the score are: (1) the 2017 Parity wallet freeze, which was developer negligence by a third-party wallet library — not intentional fraud and not a theft; (2) a 2026 Hyperbridge bridge exploit that was explicitly contained to a third-party bridge contract and did not affect the Polkadot mainnet, with losses of ~$2.5M; and (3) governance controversies over $133M treasury spending, which is a material caveat but not a fraud signal, and is further mitigated by subsequent reporting confirming ~10 years of treasury reserves. Real material caveats exist — significant ecosystem contraction (200 to ~30 active parachains), severe DOT price decline (~$55 ATH to ~$0.93 by June 2026), leadership instability, and ~14,000 third-party scam sites exploiting the brand — that place Polkadot firmly in CAUTIONARY territory. A score of 58 in the CAUTIONARY band (50-69: legitimate with material caveats) accurately reflects a legitimate but struggling blockchain platform with governance risks, no fraud history, and incidents primarily attributable to third-party negligence or third-party abuse of the brand.","score_delta":0,"sequence_num":6,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}