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/...

[2]: https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-2-part-m-chapter-...