Fox on scalar implicatures

From an online study by Fox (of Essex) on imperative logic. Fox cites Grice twice. This is the second time:

"Like many before them, they reject the contention of Hare (1967), that
the disjunction introduction rule should be valid, but only appears invalid
because of Gricean scalar implicatures. This is because no details are given
about how scalar implicatures would have the desired effect.49 Instead, they
48Conceptually, this approach has some similiarities with Pérez-Ramírez & Fox (2003a) in
distinguishing what is commanded — where we don’t want to infer p ^ q from q — from the
logical behaviour of the satisfaction criteria of what is commanded.
49As we have seen, in this paper we agree with Hare (1967), that the inference is valid, but
that it seems invalid simply because of a confusion between satisfaction conditions and refinement
relationships. Arguably, the notion of refinement has some connection with the Hare’s notion of
scalar implicatures."

---- But I think the ref. is to Hare's _conversational_ implicature simpliciter?