Very interesting post and debate. I agree, the line is a fine one between some forms of research that harnesses auto-ethnographic research along with other methods and reflexivity (not to be confused with reflective writing). However, if auto-biographical and auto-ethnographic methods are combined this constitutes a clearer case. What remains rather unacknowledged or under-debated (in literature) is the politics that are involved, issues such as status and prestige of conducting and publishing auto-ethnographic research. So it turns much more into an epistemological question that needs to be taken into account – and addressed.
I disagree with the notion that reflexive writing happens in diary-style – the main purpose of reflexivity is to identify the connection, relation and position of the researcher. This may cover aspects such as distance/involvement, social markers such as social class, ethnicity etc. in relation to the research conducted and also the question why the research was undertaken. It is meant to allow readers to assess the findings and add transparency as to possible bias.