If the people obsessing about "blogger ethics" think that there's even a hint of an ethical problem here, then, well, they should just STFU about "blogger ethics."
More generally - these types of "rules" provide a playground for assholes. They're a way to create controversy by assholes who know how to exploit these things. Jerome left blogging. Markos prominently and fully disclosed. What did Zephyr say?
I really wish he -- and every other blogger/consultant -- had an easy to find, prominent client list of all clients at all times.
See, he disclosed, but he didn't disclose enough! So, a controversy has been created when no reasonable person would find one. Look, blogging does not obligate anyone to put their whole goddamn life on display for the world - to keep a constantly updated bank statement at the top of the page. Do the lawyer bloggers post a list of all of their clients? I think half the employees of DC nonprofits/advocacy groups blog anonymously -- should they all be disclosing?
People think "blogger ethics rules" will create clear bright lines to avoid controversies -- in fact, as this fake controversy makes clear, they'll do just the o pposite.
Since disclosure is the obsession, I've met Zephyr, Jerome, Markos...
...Jesse has more. God some people are fucking clueless.