The main problem with these 3ie replications is that they are meant to be massive exercises on data mining, as Jensen and Oster clearly point out. What other purpose a replicator could pursue other than to be able to claim that the original results were not robust. We know that already! Nothing is robust 100% robust. If you estimate 100 different specifications, you will find that in at least 5% of them, one effect vanishes, and possible that will happen many more times. However, many, if not most of those 100 alternative specifications are not necessarily better than the ones reported in the paper nor even right. Thus, publish a report at the 3ie website disputing a paper is nothing more than just that.