I co-authored the paper and stand by the rigor of the evidence and arguments. If you believe there is a mistake, I would be happy to have that discussion to the extent that substantive arguments and/or evidences are presented.
In referring to "CRDT", the paper qualifies upfront that it is "CRDT for co-editors" that we focus specifically on (title and 2nd sentence in the abstract). CRDT counters, sets etc are not in scope.
In referring to "CRDT", the paper qualifies upfront that it is "CRDT for co-editors" that we focus specifically on (title and 2nd sentence in the abstract). CRDT counters, sets etc are not in scope.