Case 1 - Covert access
1) Primarily, to protect my and/or the source's identity and intel access
2) Secondarily, to obfuscate the intel to a degree that would reduce the chance of anyone's pinpointing the source
Case 2 - Overt access
3) As above, to protect my and/or the source's identity/access if deemed tactically disadvantageous to publicly reveal same
4) Again, to obfuscate the intel sufficiently to minimize the likelihood of an enemy operator pinpointing and attempting to neutralize the source
In either case:
5) Q's stated goal is to promote citizen involvement via crowdsourcing further research into, and unmasking of, the black hats
6) Encrypting the clues/intel and sending it privately only to 'need to know' allies would work directly against the stated aim of (5)
Lastly:
7) I remain agnostic re Q's product, yet hopeful that it may aid in unmasking the deep state treason
8) That snark will win you few converts
“If I were Q, privy to high level intel myself or via a 3rd party source, and my goal was the intel’s broad dissemination, I would likely employ vagueness:”
Sorry if I sounded snarky - it just doesn’t add up. People privy to classified Intel don’t mouth off on social media unless they a) have permission to share something, or b) they are a whistleblower, in which case they want to expose it - if the goal is to expose something, you need details, not vagueness.