The right way for an organization that desires this level of transparency is to use BIP32 and publish their extended public key.
This would be all well and good if every wallet client (or even most of them) actually, you know,
implemented BIP32! As it is, the best you can do is point me to a python tool? I'm capable of using it, but that just seems like a massive pain in the ass to go to. (Oh look, someone used another one of my addresses! Better boot to linux, generate the private key, and import it into my wallet!) And that's for me, a software engineer. What about the less tech-savvy users?
Moreover, most Bitcoin-related
websites don't have BIP32 support either! They take
one address for withdrawals. Some allow you to give multiple addresses, if they're a bit fancier, but even then, I'm supposed to post 50 addresses and log in to switch the address every time I get a payout?
And then there's Blockchain.info. Did you know Blockchain.info wallets reuse addresses
by default unless you create new ones?
I appreciate the intent behind this proposal, but I don't think we're ready for this change yet. I do agree that we need to do this at some point in the future, but shouldn't we, you know, roll out the infrastructure necessary to make it actually workable first?