Lucibee.
Oh, Luci!
From my experience with Eli, only the minimum data is offered in any communication. The data offered is usually obtuse and difficult to follow. Although the guy is very intelligent and well adept within his field, he tends to be too cryptic to be helpful in a discussion.
The "Smith" paper that you reference is the paper that Geoman's linked paper comments upon. BTW, I don't know whether a 'comment paper' needs to be reviewed or not to be valid as a 'comment' (in my estimation, I doubt that Geoman's linked paper needs to be reviewed to be a valid "comment").
Hope this helps.
Best regards, suricat.