I know of several people who went the O1 route and basically the process was this:
- A job offer with a "high" salary (basically it seemed anything over 100k would do the trick)
- Judged a hackathon
- "News" coverage of the hackathon
Then a big check to the immigration attorney who wrap it up in a bunch of legalese and send it off to the immigration officials who don't have enough knowledge or insight to question any of it.
From my point of view the goal is to essentially beat the immigration officials over the head with information until they just pull out their stamp and move on to then next application.
Not to say it is a loophole (though the folks I know that did go through it sure have the smug attitude that they beat the system), I think the Evidentiary Criteria is purposefully broad to leave it open for interpretation.
Adjudicators see these cases all day long. They aren't fooled, and they won't approve them.
You can really make your adjudicator's day - and secure a quick approval - with an organized, nicely presented, high-quality evidence package, that's tied together with a compelling narrative.
I'd focus on showing how your work is new and cool, how it makes an impact on the world, and what acclaim you've gotten (media coverage, awards) for doing it.