Dan -
I understand the perceived conflict 100%. I am also a HUGE believer in avoiding even the appearance of a conflict of interest.
Would it be best if Mr. Whitten disclosed his relationship with Hurdzan Fry or whomever before, during or after the article on Fazio? Certainly.
However, as I pointed out, Ron holds no actual power over anyone. He is a critic (and a pretty good one, too, but that's not the point). In the past, he has, I believe, ruled that The Architect's Club ineligible for any of GD's awards, due to his involvement in the project. That is proper, and a much clearer example of how one is to avoid even the appearance of a conflict. Regardless of whether or not he would actively use his position to influence voters (and to be clear, I don't believe he would), there is no doubt that some raters might feel pressure to rate his projects higher than they otherwise might.
It is also completely fair to bring up his perceived conflict when discussing the articles.
To say he cannot engage in both his role as architectural editor for GD and continue to act in a consulting role with anyone is flat out absurd and is holding him to a standard that virtually no other critic is being held to. As someone stated earlier, he sought out Fazio in advance of publication and offered him the opportunity to respond.
Additionally, as I pointed out earlier, if one reads Ron's reviews, it is quite clear that he holds many different opinions on the courses rated/ranked than the GD raters.
So I ask again, how much of a conflict can there be, when Ron Whitten holds no power over anyone other than through opinion, and that very opinion is often not in agreement with GD's raters?