It might work in practice, but it really does not seem to meet the spirit to me. It’s definitely not true to just say “being a judge in a hackathon is one of th

It might work in practice, but it really does not seem to meet the spirit to me. It’s definitely not true to just say “being a judge in a hackathon is one of the criterion” directly. Actual regulation is: Evidence of the alien's participation on a panel, or individually, as a judge of the work of others in the same or in an allied field of specialization to that for which classification is sought;[1] is one of eight criterion (of which meeting three is required). Examples given by USCIS[2] are: Examples of relevant evidence may include, but are not limited to: Reviewer of abstracts or papers submitted for presentation at scholarly conferences in the respective field; Peer reviewer for scholarly publications; Member of doctoral dissertation committees; and Peer reviewer for government research funding programs. Which seems to indicate rather more prestige than “judging a hackathon” is the intent of the regulation. [1]: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-B/part-214/subpart-A/section-214.2 https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-8/chapter-I/subchapter-B/... [2]: https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-2-part-m-chapter-4 https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-2-part-m-chapter-...