The Golf Digest criteria are below. The first one is double weighted. The definition of shot values stresses expert golfers as much as it does strategy. I hope they don't actually have their raters doing #2, as the USGA already does it, and it can be gotten from the scorecard. They are clearly not doing these ratings for the average golfer, i.e., their readers. I guess that means Tom H has sold out to the ad department of GD.
From their criteria, it seems apparent to me why there is so much disagreement with their results on this website.
1. SHOT VALUES
How well does the course pose risks and rewards and equally test length, accuracy and finesse?
2. RESISTANCE TO SCORING
How difficult, while still being fair, is the course for a scratch player from the back tees?
3. DESIGN VARIETY
How varied are the golf course's holes in differing lengths, configurations, hazard placements, green shapes and green contours?
4. MEMORABILITY
How well do the design features (tees, fairways, greens, hazards, vegetation and terrain) provide individuality to each hole, yet a collective continuity to the entire 18?
5. AESTHETICS
How well do the scenic values of the course (including landscaping, vegetation, water features and backdrops) add to the pleasure of a round?
6. CONDITIONING
How firm, fast and rolling were the fairways, and how firm yet receptive were the greens on the day you played the course?
7. AMBIENCE
How well does the overall feel and atmosphere of the course reflect or uphold the traditional values of the game?