The Downfall of Hydro.Online, Just Another Scam involving Crypto?

1. Background of Gather Network and Rebranding
2. Early Red Flags and Communication Breakdown
3. Hydro.Online on Social Media, Smoke and Mirrors
4. Lack of Support and Accountability
5. Arbitrary Bans and Lack of Transparency
6. The Concerning Payment Issues
7. My Personal Thoughts, Is Hydro.Online Just Another Scam?

If you consider this article valuable, I'd appreciate a coffee !

This may be the final article I write about Hydro.Online, as I fully expect the team to sever any remaining connections I have with this project. With that in mind, I encourage you to read the following lines carefully and form your own opinion about whether this platform is worth considering as a side hustle, especially if you are a blog author.

In June 2024, I joined Hydro.Online as a publisher with high hopes. At first glance, the project appeared promising. Its mission was to revolutionize content monetization for creators, particularly bloggers. I even documented my satisfaction with the platform in my early articles Maximizing Website Revenue | Using Hydro Alongside Google AdSense for Extra Website Income and no extra Ads and A Month of Insights and Revenue Growth on Hydro.Online, praising its timely payments and ease of use. But things began to unravel by September 2024.

As you continue reading this article, you may notice sections of text highlighted in blue. These sections provide additional information added during the writing process, offering a timeline that captures updates as they unfolded. The blue text is meant to show how my understanding evolved, reflecting the information I gathered over time while writing this piece. This approach allows you to see both my initial observations and any relevant changes or insights that emerged later, giving a fuller picture of the research and context behind this article.

Background of Gather Network and Rebranding

Before rebranding, Hydro.Online was called the Gather Network, which aimed to create a decentralized content monetization ecosystem. Gather Network focused on allowing users to monetize their online content through innovative solutions that rewarded both creators and consumers. However, as the platform evolved, it faced various challenges, including a lack of transparency, fluctuating user engagement, and rising competition in the crypto space.

The decision to rebrand from Gather Network to Hydro.Online was driven by a need for clarity and improved communication about the platform's objectives. The team recognized that the initial branding had become associated with questionable practices, which ultimately hurt their reputation. The rebranding aimed to present a more professional image and reaffirm their commitment to a fair monetization system for content creators.

The primary difference between the platform before and after the rebranding lies in its focus and operational strategy. Post-rebranding, Gather Network emphasized transparency, better user engagement, and the establishment of a clearer roadmap for future developments. The goal was to foster a more trustworthy environment for users while addressing previous criticisms regarding support and accountability yet they failed delivering the main things that lead to rebranding in the first place.

After conducting a thorough background check on all 15 team members of Hydro.Online, I found no evidence linking any of them to past involvement in online scams. At least, there were no credible sources or reports that suggest they have been involved in any fraudulent activities. This was somewhat reassuring at first, as it indicated that the team might have a clean track record in terms of legal issues. However, despite the absence of a documented history of scams, this doesn't negate the persistent problems seen in their handling of the platform, especially when it comes to their relationship with publishers and the broader community.

Given this, and taking into account the reasons behind their rebranding, it seems clear that the Hydro.Online team has failed to learn from past mistakes. The same patterns of poor community management and lack of accountability continue to surface. Instead of improving their operations, they appear to be repeating the same problematic behaviors, disregarding the concerns and needs of their publishers. This ongoing negligence suggests that while they may not have a history of scamming, their failure to grow from previous errors is just as damaging, contributing to an environment of mistrust and frustration.

Early Red Flags and Communication Breakdown

The lack of communication and transparency and all the delayed deadlines raised my first alarm bell. In any legitimate project, especially in the volatile crypto space, clear communication is critical. When the main deadlines are constatly delayed, it’s often a sign that things are about to go wrong.

I promised myself I would maintain impartiality and document both the good and the bad. Early on, the positives were evident, reliable payments, active support, and a transparent roadmap. But as the months passed, it became harder to ignore the increasing signs that something was off.

Hydro.Online on Social Media, Smoke and Mirrors

Hydro.Online frequently boasts about its rising social media numbers. In their blog posts, they cite significant growth, but these figures are incredibly misleading. The boost in followers and engagement is largely a result of campaigns run through Zealy.io, which require participants to join and subscribe to Hydro.Online’s social media channels in exchange for rewards. This artificial inflation of numbers creates a false image of success. It’s akin to buying followers rather than earning them organically through genuine interest in the platform.

For example, as of October 14th, 2024, Hydro.Online’s social media stats were as follows:

• Twitter/X: 252 Following • 210.6K Followers (Created in May 2024)
• Facebook: 4.5K Likes • 4.5K Followers (Created in June 2024)
• Instagram: 123 Posts • 16.5K Followers • 22 Following (Created in July 2024)
• Telegram: 41.6K Members (Created in June 2024)
• TikTok: 0 Following • 172 Followers • 49 Likes (Created in September 2024)
• LinkedIn: 20K Followers (Created in August 2024)

On paper, these numbers look impressive. However, closer inspection reveals that the majority of these followers are likely the result of incentive-driven subscriptions through platforms like Zealy.io. The stark contrast between platforms, such as TikTok's 172 followers and Twitter’s 210K, shows inconsistency no matter when the TikTok account was created. This disparity reinforces the belief that these social media metrics are inflated and manipulated to appear more successful than they truly are.

Lack of Support and Accountability

One of the biggest frustrations I encountered was Hydro.Online’s poor user support. They have a special Telegram group for publishers, which they call the “Focus Group.” In theory, it’s a space where publishers can discuss ideas and the future of the project. To gain access, one must fill out a Google form, which sounds simple enough. However, despite filling out this form twice, I was never added to the group. Even worse, when I opened a support ticket to address this, the response was delayed by a month, only for my ticket to be closed with a generic comment: “Old ticket. Please create a new ticket if the problem persists.”

The dismissiveness of this response was infuriating. Should I really open a new ticket just to wait another month for the same outcome? This experience was a massive red flag. Legitimate companies don’t treat their users or partners like this. If you’re constantly being redirected or dismissed, it’s often because the company has no real intention of solving the issue.

While working on this article, I was finally granted access to the Hydro Online Focus Group, a move I’d been waiting on for some time. However, despite my initial anticipation, I chose not to revise what I had already written. Even after being accepted, my experience in the group has been underwhelming. After nearly two weeks of observation, the activity level is disappointingly low, with no significant discussions or pressing issues being addressed. The group, once thought to be a hub for user feedback and improvement ideas, now appears inactive, raising questions about its purpose and effectiveness in representing the community's voice.

I fully support the decision to ban phishy websites, but if the concern is about low-quality or spammy projects, there are better ways to address this. For instance, you could validate the domain age or restrict certain domain extensions like .blogspot to ensure only credible websites are part of the project. There are plenty of methods to control the quality of sites without resorting to drastic measures. The way these situations have been handled, particularly by the CEO, is deeply concerning. Mocking any publisher, regardless of their behavior, speaks volumes about the CEO's personality and his inability to manage conflict professionally. This is not the approach that should be taken in a situation like this, especially from someone in a leadership position. And I'm speaking from the perspective of a Business Administration student specializing in Leadership and Management, as well as a full-time programmer.

Another significant reason why I believe this project suffers from poor management is the CEO's contradictory claims. On one hand, the CEO insists that publishers were never asked to pay anything, questioning how it could be considered a scam. However, without publishers, the business model wouldn't generate any revenue. Despite his assertions that the project is legitimate, it’s clear that the publishers play a critical role in its success. This makes the CEO's stance seem disingenuous. On September 15th, 2024, I woke up to find all my websites wiped from the Hydro dashboard, along with my entire payment history. When I tried to re-add the sites, I was met with an error message stating my website was already verified, but by whom? This reflects how flawed and unreliable their ownership verification process is.

Additionally, Reggie, the CEO, appeared on Telegram following the September biweekly update, seemingly mocking the publishers instead of addressing their concerns. This behavior further illustrates the lack of professionalism in the project's management. The second biweekly announcement for October was also never posted, adding to the growing frustration among the community. In an effort to follow their rules, I refrained from raising the issue in the general chat and instead opened a ticket to address the matter. It’s clear the team hasn’t learned from past mistakes and continues to repeat them, leaving publishers in the dark and feeling neglected.

From my perspective, critical issues like the wiping, should be addressed within 12 hours, especially when they impact users so heavily. The lack of timely support reflects poorly on the platform's commitment to its publishers. In addition, many users have complained not only about the wiping issue but also about delayed payments. The excuse given for this delay was that the team is preparing for the launch of Hydro Plus. However, such reasoning does little to inspire confidence, as it seems to prioritize new features over resolving existing issues that directly affect the current user base.

After seeing no progress regarding the wiping issue and receiving no response to my support ticket, I decided to take matters into my own hands and raise the issue on Telegram, despite the risk of having my message deleted. Initially, the moderators were polite and requested my ticket ID, assuring me that they would escalate the matter and urging me to remain patient. However, it has now been three days without any resolution. I am not the only one experiencing this problem, others on Telegram have voiced similar concerns. The responses to these inquiries, unfortunately, have been far from professional, often coming across as immature and dismissive. This behavior leaves me questioning the seriousness of the platform as a whole.

After a week, my support ticket was finally resolved. All of my websites reappeared in the dashboard, along with the full income data I’d previously lost. I was relieved, but my experience left me with lingering doubts. In the meantime, I reached out to other users who had reported similar issues, hoping they’d received similar resolutions. Unfortunately, many were still waiting, with no response from support. It made me wonder, was my case given priority due to my articles, as Hydro might want to avoid a negative public image? Or is the support team genuinely overwhelmed and struggling to keep up with user requests? The lack of transparency and inconsistency in responses makes it difficult to say for certain, but these are questions that users, including myself, are left to ponder.

What’s even more concerning is that it’s no longer about the payments or financial issues. The core problem lies in how the publishers are treated by the team. The lack of communication, transparency, and genuine support has created a toxic environment where publishers are left in the dark and their concerns are routinely ignored. For me, this is unacceptable. No project can succeed if it continuously disrespects and neglects the very people who help drive it forward.

Arbitrary Bans and Lack of Transparency

Another alarming issues reported by several users is the sudden banning and blocking from Hydro.Online with no explanation or prior warning. Many publishers found their accounts deactivated without receiving any emails or notifications detailing the reasons behind the actions. This lack of communication has raised serious concerns about the platform's management and fairness.

In numerous complaints shared within the community, publishers have expressed frustration over being locked out of their accounts, which directly impacts their ability to monetize content and engage with the platform. The absence of a clear appeal process or customer support response further exacerbates the situation. Users feel vulnerable and helpless, unable to rectify what they perceive as arbitrary decisions made by the Hydro.Online team.

This troubling trend of unexplained bans signals a troubling lack of accountability and transparency, leaving many to question the integrity of the platform. It contributes to the growing belief that Hydro.Online may not have the best interests of its publishers at heart, further reinforcing suspicions of it being a scam.

The Concerning Payment Issues

Another major issue arose with payments. Up until September 23rd, 2024, I had no problem receiving payments on time. However, rumors started swirling in the community that Hydro.Online was changing its payment cycle to biweekly, though no official announcement was made. Others speculated that payments were being delayed due to the upcoming Token Generation Event (TGE) the much-anticipated launch of Hydro.Online’s own cryptocurrency.

What is most troubling is the lack of transparency around these payments. When publishers ask about them in the public Telegram group, their comments are quickly deleted, and they’re directed to fill out the same form to join the “Focus Group.” This cycle of deflection only reinforces suspicions that Hydro.Online is intentionally withholding payments while stringing publishers along with the promise of future crypto profits.

After considerable backlash from frustrated users, Hydro Online finally disclosed that payments would be paused until November 15th. This announcement provided some clarity, but it also raised new concerns. Many are now left wondering if the platform will adhere to this deadline, or if further delays are on the horizon. The uncertainty around payment schedules has shaken user confidence, and only time will tell if Hydro Online can follow through on its promise and restore trust among its user base.

Once again, the Hydro.Online team has provided yet another excuse. Despite assurances, November 15th has come and gone without the promised payments being processed, another missed deadline that has left publishers increasingly frustrated. Serious questions remain: will the payments ever be made? Will Hydro Plus ever be launched? The lack of transparency, coupled with inconsistent timelines and repeated delays, continues to erode confidence in the platform. Adding to this growing frustration, the team quietly updated their blog post to replace the specific date of "November 15th" with a vague statement: "We’re expecting to be back up and running around 30 days from this announcement." This change, made without notifying users or including an update timestamp, raises further concerns about professionalism and accountability. Publishers who saw the original article can verify this inconsistency, further underscoring the lack of clarity and commitment from the Hydro.Online team. Statements like "Once we reach the QA stage, everything will go smoothly," especially coming from the CEO after a missed deadline, are unacceptable and only deepen the dissatisfaction among stakeholders.

My Personal Thoughts, Is Hydro.Online Just Another Scam?

After months of observing the behavior of Hydro.Online and its management, I’ve come to a disheartening conclusion, this project is perceived just as a joke by the community team. While it started with great potential, several red flags have become too obvious to ignore. The business model appears unsustainable, and it seems that the payments to publishers are reliant on investor funds rather than actual revenue generation.

As with many crypto scams, by what Hydro.Online does, it looks like a “rug pull” planing, a tactic where the project creators hype up a token, collect investors money, and then disappear, leaving everyone else with worthless tokens. They have already set the stage with the delay in payments, and by pushing the TGE narrative, they are buying time. Once the TGE occurs, there may be a brief window where some payments are made, increasing the perceived value of their token. But after that, I suspect they will vanish, taking investors’ money with them.

In my view, Hydro.Online was never designed to be a long-term solution for content creators. Instead, it looks like a carefully orchestrated action designed to prey on mid-sized publishers while building up hype for a cryptocurrency launch that will never deliver. As we approach the TGE, I would caution anyone involved with Hydro.Online to be very careful and consider pulling out before it’s too late.

In conclusion, what initially appeared to be a revolutionary platform for content creators is now showing all the signs of a bad management. The inflated social media numbers, lack of support, delayed payments, and vague promises of a TGE all point to a project that is on the brink of collapsing or worse, pulling the rug out from under its users and investors. If you’re involved with Hydro.Online or considering joining, I urge you to proceed with caution. The red flags are there, and the downfall of Hydro.Online may be imminent.

The team members at Hydro.Online appear to have strong professional backgrounds with no credible allegations of involvement in scams. While concerns about the platform’s management and practices have been raised, particularly regarding user experiences, the individual members have maintained reputations within their respective fields.