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 · Syscoin
- Sequence
- #4
- Score
- 26 → 26 (0)
- Cluster
- mainnet-beta
- Slot
- 464364650
- Off-chain at
- 2026-11-02T04:41:40.230Z
- Anchored at
- 2026-11-02T04:41:55.000Z
- Block time
- 2026-11-02T04:41:55.000Z
Independent verification
- 1. Database (off-chain)
- 9WA8AreME21U3UsxDotrVytpVUCPMV1JqXj2eugeXmsQ
- 2. Recomputed (your browser)
- computing…
- 3. On-chain (Solana memo)
- fetching…
Canonical bytes hashed (1713 chars)
{"actor":"judge","artifact_identity":"0fc298d0f810b2c084795927e210f3cc","band_override":null,"blocked_count":1,"decided_at":"2026-11-02T04:41:40.000Z","decision":"review_revise","delist_requested":false,"disputed_pct":0.25,"investigation_id":"078f37a7-dac7-42dd-a304-cbd30b11626b","judge_def_hash":"8800307026131ea9d5da939d32b9a1f1884b2b84a5de33c8e87931d36f38d0f8","new_score":26,"page_slug":"syscoin","prev_score":26,"reason":"The core June 2026 exploit account (date, ~5 billion SYS minted, $8.56M value, addresses, recovery, burn, bridge paused) was confirmed against Rekt News and Syscoin's official postmortem (claim_findings[0], [1], [7]). Three claims could not be verified (Kennedy's conviction, the 2024 Dutch complaint dates, the Binance margin delisting; claim_findings[10]-[12]), and one more could not be checked because its source blocked the reviewer, which is a coverage limit and not counted against the page. That gives 3 of 12 countable claims, or 25%, in the minor band. Several details are also imprecise: the June 18 burn announcement date conflicts with the official June 15 postmortem and June 17 press coverage (claim_findings[5]), the post-disclosure ~40% price drop timing is not supported (claim_findings[2], [3]), and Rekt News is wrongly called a security firm (claim_findings[6]). No material omission or conflict with the subject's current status was found, and reviewer confidence is moderate, so the penalty is kept at the low end.","reviewer_def_hash":"bc11388ce4bc4deea1b064fea362663ae06e3f4f687f99604769044d6ffba770","score_delta":0,"scored_claims":12,"sequence_num":4,"submission_content_hash":null,"submission_id":null,"submission_kind":null,"submission_valence":null,"v":1}