"Reason to be cautious about Hydraze"

People wanted me to negatively review Hydraze instead of slashing him, so I am doing that here. Hydraze promoted what is now alleged in federal court to be a Ponzi scheme- and he wasn't just a bystander. He sat on the governance team of the UA3/StakX syndicate structure (according to the lawsuit), was a signatory on the multi-signature wallet that controlled investor funds (according to the lawsuit), and actively directed his On Chain Buccaneers community to deposit money into these instruments. They even had their own 15% weekly return pool just for OCB (lol) The scheme, TradeAI and later StakX, promised returns like *15% every 10 days with "principal protection."* That's roughly 14,000% annualized. Anyone with basic financial literacy knows that's a Ponzi. A later review of over one million transactions found the trading accounts actually lost more than $4 million; the only way anyone got paid was with money from newer depositors. Hydraze posted on Discord claiming depositors were earning 14.58% in a single week. He told his community the syndicate was "asset backed with $15M worth of Banksy art." He funneled his followers in, and when it collapsed, suddenly claimed he had "zero visibility" into the accounts, and still does today (why wouldn't he?) This isn't a one-off either. Hydraze also recently promoted Aquabot, another project that rugged its community, backed by a shady partnership. The pattern is clear- build trust, promote "opportunities" through partnerships, and when things collapse, distance yourself. His followers / people in OCB aren't partners in these ventures.. they're exit liquidity (and somehow they don't seem to know it?) Some have told me I should wait for the court to decide before taking any action on Ethos. But that argument has never once been the standard for a single slash or review on this platform. Ethos is entirely independent of the court system; it's a community driven credibility layer, not a legal tribunal. No one has ever been required to wait for a verdict before slashing. Credibility scores are meant to reflect what the community knows right now, not what a judge rules two years from now. Those who defended against the slash told me to leave a negative review instead, so here we are. Final statement: his credibility score on Ethos doesn't reflect any of this. His score gives him a stamp of trustworthiness people rely on when deciding whether to follow him into the next opportunity. His trustworthiness comes almost exclusively from a small group of friends in various alpha groups. While this is the definition of reputable per the protocol today, I don't believe Hydraze is as reputable as his followers tend to think he is.