I don't think I endorse his reasoning, but I think you misread him.

It is not inconceivable that I misread him. Mind reading is a task that is particularly difficult when it comes to working out precisely which mistake someone is making when at least part of their reasoning is visibly broken. My subjectively experienced amusement applies to what seemed to be the least insane of the interpretations. Your explanation requires the explanation to be wrong (ie. it wouldn't be analogous to one boxing at all) rather than merely the label.

Death knows you use CDT, should you choose the opposite of what CDT normally recommends?

That wouldn't make much sense (for the reasoning in the paper).