In Case of Emergency write-only access

[pseudomonas]

Title:
In Case of Emergency write-only access

Area:
Posting

Summary:
Give limited access to a small number of other DW users to make posts on your behalf, with restrictions. [New feature suggestion]

Description:
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.

Other methods:
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.

Considerations:
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.

Poll #15788 In Case of Emergency write-only access

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 61

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
32 (52.5%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
15 (24.6%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
2 (3.3%)

(I have no opinion)
12 (19.7%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)