Four AI personas help screen projects in the first round: an engineer, a designer, a thinker and a community builder, each asking a different question about your app. People judge the finals.
AI helps with the first round. People judge the finals.
Amjad Masad + Al-Jazari
Does it work, and can people use it?
Mimar Sinan + Peter Gould
Is it clear, thoughtful, and well made?
Ibn Khaldun + Mohammed Faris
Will it make a useful, lasting difference?
Fatima Al-Fihriyya + Amany Killawi
Who does it help, and who might it leave out?
Fictional AI personas inspired by the people named. They do not represent or speak for those people.
Every project is judged on the same four questions. A polished or technically complex app still has to answer them.
Does it answer a real Ramadan need for the people it’s built for?
Is it clear and accessible to people in different situations?
Judges open the live app, sign in with the account you give them, and try the main flow. Is it working and well made?
Can the team explain the problem, the approach, and why it matters?
The proposed review process
Each review should say what the reviewer saw, what works and what still needs work. Organizers run the process and make the final decisions.
The app, the demo and the project notes, checked against the same criteria. Reviews point to what the project shows and say what they couldn’t check.
Strengths, questions and concerns go side by side. Where reviews disagree, we go back to the project to see what was missed.
Organizers handle conflicts of interest, apply the criteria and write down why each winner was chosen.
We’re still finalizing the rubric and exactly how AI is used in the first round. People judge the finals. The four personas are ways of reviewing a project, not endorsements from the people who inspired them.