Three emails for delays. Zero announcements for an investigation. Why?

Results were originally scheduled for March 4. They were delayed four times — first with no new date given, then to April 1, then to April 8, then to April 13–17. They were finally announced on April 21, missing even the last promised window. Each time, Devpost assured all 35,000+ participants that the extra time was needed to ensure a thorough and fair evaluation.

Four delays. Each one promising thoroughness. And the result?

Since results were announced, the community has raised serious, verifiable concerns across both the Devpost forum and the #gemini-3-hackathon-general-chat Discord channel:

- Grand prize repo references another hackathon project in its first commit
- Undisclosed third-party tools in winning codebases (including direct competitors to Google)
- Model specs in the grand prize tagline that don't exist on any Gemini 3 model
- Submission video displaying a different model version than what was listed in Built With
- Third-place description structured as prompt injection targeting evaluators
- An honorable mention submission video reported by multiple participants to have no audio
- Multiple independent technical reviews by participants all reaching the same conclusions

These aren't opinions. They're observable in public GitHub repos, Devpost submission pages, and submission videos.

On the forum, a Devpost manager responded two days ago in brief comments on two forum threads: "We will look into each of them diligently and remain committed to fairness and integrity." On Discord, a participant publicly tagged Devpost management requesting a response. No reply was given there.

You sent emails for every delay. An investigation into the integrity of the results deserves at least the same visibility. The community is asking for:

1. An official update sent to all participants acknowledging the concerns
2. A transparent investigation process and findings — not another black box
3. A clear statement on how Devpost and Google intend to address the outcomes
4. A post-mortem on the evaluation process itself — how these issues were not caught despite four delays and repeated assurances of thoroughness
5. A public statement from Google DeepMind specifically — not just Devpost. The delay updates explicitly stated that "our judging panel includes members of the Google DeepMind team." If DeepMind staff were involved in the evaluation, Google owes participants a direct response, not silence behind a third-party platform

It is also worth noting that the grand prize includes "social promotion of the winning project." As of today, Google has published no blog post, no news release, and no social media announcement about the winners. For comparison, the GKE Hackathon (4,773 participants) received a full Google Cloud Blog post with detailed winner profiles. The Gemini 3 Hackathon (35,000+ participants, $100,000 in prizes) has received nothing. If the results can't be promoted, that itself is an answer.

The evidence is already publicly visible in the winning repos and submission pages. The scope is 13 winning projects, not 4,500. This should not be a difficult or lengthy investigation.

Transparency isn't optional when $100,000 and Google DeepMind's name are on the line.

Some community discussion for reference:
https://gemini3.devpost.com/forum_topics/43673-are-these-the-standards-deepmind-wants-developers-to-follow
https://gemini3.devpost.com/forum_topics/43663-winners-rant
https://gemini3.devpost.com/forum_topics/43667-third-place-was-a-prompt-injection-attack-devpost-and-google-owe-participants-an-answer
https://gemini3.devpost.com/forum_topics/43685-evaluation-transparency-seeking-a-technical-response-equivalent-to-the-build-what-s-next-mandate