I would suggest specifying under “critique” that critique by the community is also crucial, not just self-reflection. This becomes a key part of the radical inclusion; opening the process of assessment and reassessment, even of the means and methods of the hackathon itself, to the broader public. It would take a lot of extra work to get feedback from people uninterested in the topic, but I think that would make the project even stronger–why is climate change so often considered an uninteresting or worn topic? How does the community reflect on and critique efforts to address it?

I see the hackathon as even including more stakeholders than previously mentioned. Consider not just home-owners, but those without homes. Consider a diversity of ages too. Maybe even broaden it to an ecological footprint–who built the resident’s homes? who cleans the streets? who produces their home products? who controls the shape of the city? who tries to control it? In the convening, I could be present and representative of certain groups, but I could also extend the work to my own networks of friends and colleagues. I see the hackathon as a huge event, breaking down barriers of entry by being outside, not limited by thresholds of walls, by being outside of typical work hours, by providing services for people who need them in order to attend (food, child care, etc). I could help with these things!