In Case of Emergency write-only access
Give limited access to a small number of other DW users to make posts on your behalf, with restrictions. [New feature suggestion]
What I want is a write-only function where (say) I nominate (say) you as an In-Case-of-Emergency poster for if I'm (say) ill in hospital; you can then post to my DW, but without any ability to see locked entries, modify settings, modify circle, or anything else; furthermore there'd be a prominent heading applied to any posts you made saying "posted by [YOURUSERNAMEHERE]", so impersonation wouldn't be possible. I can always delete or modify the posts that you have made on my behalf. Crossposting would work as normal.
a) implement this as an external website, using OpenID to verify you and store my password. Requires competently-run, secure, trustworthy third-party site. Need to remember to log in to that site every time I change my DW password.
b) give you my password. Trusts you to keep it safe, not lose it, and I have to tell you every time I change it. Allows impersonation and account-modification.
c) Give you my post-by-mail credentials. As above, but doesn't allow impersonation, eats an address slot per person, and only works for paid/permanent users.
d) The one that usually gets done these days - you making unlocked posts and hoping that enough of my circle see the post and that I don't have anyone I'd rather didn't know. This has the advantage of being simple, but is really not an effective solution to the problem.
I would favour the poster having the ability to post using any publicly-visible security setting that would let the poster see the post (at least "access-list-only" or "public") and possibly edit posts that they have themselves made (but not remove the header saying that the post was made by them). I don't see much need for anything beyond that; they can comment on posts as themselves.
I would envision small number of people given these posting privileges, though I don't have a particular limit in mind, and I don't see a really good reason to put a hard-limit on things.
There's always a risk that someone will post a malicious or spurious report, but really they can do that *anyway* via method d), it's called lying, and it's a social problem that is solved by only authorizing people that you trust not to do that kind of thing.
Should be implemented as-is.
Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
Shouldn't be implemented.
(I have no opinion)
(Other: please comment)