After a conversation on Discord, I think this is a good idea.
I'm not sure how well-known this feature is, given that I discovered it today, so I'll post a link real quick.
First, I want to discuss the arguments against it, since the warning given seems extremely ominous. The warning itself doesn't really elaborate on why, so I've been left to guess for myself + no one on Discord really made an extremely strong argument worthy of such a warning against it either.
One argument was that Word Choice data is more objective than simple meta (which, ofc, is the only type of OGI that is allowed) - which could take away the skill element of mafia and instead turns it into a matter of plugging things into Word Choice and seeing what it says about their alignment. I find this to be a pretty bad argument - Word Choice itself doesn't calculate anything about alignments, and the information it provides is Not Very Useful in figuring out alignments the long term as it is very easy to change your statistics and adapt your town and wolf metas to be more alike (at least in terms of "what words should I post more"). I think claiming that it will ruin the game to any considerable extent is just plain wrong. All it does is bring some aspects of meta that are commonly ignored (due to the effort required in compiling this data) "into the light."
Another argument following that counterpoint is that it'll place more of an importance of solving based on meta. I won't claim it won't, I think it will increase the amount of meta solving done, but I also don't think that's really that much of a bad thing, nor do I think it will change the way people solve to a major extent. All it does is give town another mediocre tool to add to their toolbox.
The last major argument I saw is that people can use the fact that you can post them to pressure players into posting them when they don't want to and... I don't really buy that. This wouldn't take down the "don't pressure players into giving their Word Count data" rule and that would still be punishable. That being said, there's more nuance to this - you could have scenarios where no one explicitly pressures a player to post it but they feel pressured regardless (say because they are the top wagon) and I agree, that is extremely hard to moderate - so I propose not allowing players to share their data if they are currently playing a game on MU. This is still somewhat hard to moderate, but it's like how moderating cheating can be hard - moderating people who break this are moderating people who are privately explicitly breaking the rules, not people who are taking advantage of a loophole.
the tl;dr of this whole section being that I don't believe that implementing this change will introduce complications that other aspects of the game/site that we allow don't.
Ok, now to talk about why this should be allowed.
I want to note really quick that this change would make the choice to release this information voluntary - so anyone uncomfortable with the idea of giving players more meta on them doesn't have to do it (in other words, anyone who does this wants people to know this).
Personally, I'm proposing this because I would love for players to have more meta on me. It makes it easier for me to be caught based on how I play the game - which in turn incentivizes me to make my town and wolf metas closer. You can make the argument that it's an issue on my end that I'm not motivated to improve without a risk to myself, but I don't think that's a fair argument because I feel like that is a significant part of what drives human behavior in the first place - it simply doesn't feel worth it to put in the effort to analyze my Word Choice stats when there's not going to be a tangible benefit.
I don't really know why else people would want to post their stats besides stuff that essentially boils down to trust-telling, which is banned.