I don't think the btilly thought he was refuting the article, just commenting on a not-very-central-but-important misperception that it seemed to contain, and it seems to be accurate - implicit precommital to experimental details in a replication solves some of what pre-registration is about but not all of it and arguably not the more important bit. This seems to be true whether or not the article's thesis holds, and this being true doesn't undermine the article's thesis.
