So we deployed the partner badge creation to the badges.p2pu.org, which means that there will be badges which can be only awarded by their author which is connected to the partner. For now I just entered two (School of Open and School of Data).
So if someone wants to provide another partner let me know. There is still another thing before this functionality can be consumed:
I need a list of users and the partner they belong to so I can grant them a partner. Another thing that I need is for those users to be signed up in badges.p2pu.org (which means they just have to log in with their p2pu.org account), after that they will be privileged to make partner badges.
When I discussed this functionality with Vanessa (and Jane) we talked about a low-tech solution to this. What if we ask partners to simply use one account. They would share one username and password. This would keep us out of the business of having to manage these expert reviewer communities (supporting people joining, leaving, etc.). What I liked about that approach was that it would let us test demand before we build out more sophisticated features to support it.
Managing partner affiliations and partners aren’t really that much work: all the code for it is here and here.
The logic to decide how and when to award a badge had to be revised to account for partners. This entails more work as it also involves the normal process for feedback and revision.
@Erika how can we see the updates, maybe we need to make a P2PU partner 
and add ourselves to it?
It’s just another level of complexity I was hoping we could avoid. Vanessa and I weren’t super excited about the idea of badges that are not awarded by the community - and these things always end up being more complicated than originally anticipated. We wanted to start with a super low tech solution to see how people would use it, before we build out the functionality to support this on a larger scale (I don’t think we are certain that this is something we would like to see more widely used).
If we ask partners to use one account, it would just be a simple flag somewhere that identifies the badges as a partner badge. If we have to manage partner accounts it adds complexity, and we need an interface to add/edit who can award the badge. For example -> How do I get added to the list of people who can award the partner badge? Can anyone who is on that list, remove others who are also on the list, or can each person only remove themselves? How do I find the list in order to remove myself (is there a link on my profile page?) Is there a super badge awarder, who manages the other awarders? In the first case I can see lots of confusion if people accidentally remove each other. In the second case, we are now up to three levels of user rights. These are all things I was hoping we could not worry about for now.
@1L2P I agree that it’s good to skip that level of complexity.
Currently all the management of partners are done via Django admin by the admin account for badges (not an actual P2PU user). People who are partners have no control over it other than that they can create partner badges.
@Erika correct me if I’m wrong?
And we shall not. I say that we need not complicate as much in any case.Functionality for users to be able to make partner badges is there and this is about everything that I suggest us doing on this matter. We are providing this for those that need to be in control of their badges, but they have to reach out to us and ask for this to be enabled for them (I suspect that they will optimize the number of users that will make such badges on their behalf, so not everyone in their organization will make partner badges, just bcs they will have to ask us every time for every user to be enabled). So as far as complexity for the users go all will be managed by us (naming me), so if SOO is one of the partners and Jane is their “representative” than I will be the one who will add her to the partner (eventually Dirk if I am unable, but no one else).
Since this is not as you said something we want to see widely used the management of users that are enabled (which I presume will be 10 at the most, for now only Janes name came up anyway) I think we can manage that. If at any later stage this would be a functionality that is needed more than we shall worry about levels of users and what they can to to themselves and each other and so on.
And on the other hand this is developed already (means we can not take the time it took me to make it back), so let’s use it as it was planed and see if it will be really as daunting as you anticipate it and let’s not spend more time on this.
I will make P2PU a partner and add us to it like @dirk said so we can see it in action.
You are right (I like it more like that bcs it sounds way more positive as “you are not wrong”) 
p.s.: who else thinks smileys in here are way weird?
Yeah, I think discourse addresses many problems with online discussion, but imho smilies have never been one of those problems 
1 Like
Excellent. I’m glad we feel the same way about complexity. Let’s see how this goes. @Erika - thanks for explaining how it all works in more detail!