IIRC, Swordmaker mentioned months back when he was looking for volunteers to help refine the Lexicon that when Q asks us to reread older post topics that Q has altered/updated some of the original content.
Can’t cite an example and haven’t seen a post by Swordy for a while, but perhaps he can confirm or deny that practice. That may be what Q is prepping to do with these placeholder posts.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `
I can’t speak for Swordmaker, but I can report that I’ve been one of his assistant proofreading editors. I have personally found a few Q posts which I sought to verify with a LexiQon entry, and they were no longer in the Q drops.
I have found several instances where numbering has shifted as much as 3-4 drop number slots, for example (not an actual example - made up for illustration only:) Let’s say an entry references #3..... but #3 is not the subject the LexiQon has referenced. Instead, the content of what used to be #3 is found to be now #6 or #7. AGAIN this is NOT an actual expample, but an illustration of what I have run into on several occasions.
I have personally found a few Q posts which I sought to verify with a LexiQon entry, and they were no longer in the Q drops.
~~~~
I found a few like that when I was proofing a section...
Thanks, Texokie.
Hopefully Swordmaker is just busy with life and/or new Apple related product releases and will rejoin us again soon.
I did find this (below) in his Lexicon header which helps confirm that changes have taken place.
“IMPORTANT NOTE — It turns out there is a very good reason Q is always saying to re-read the “crumbs” or Drops! They’ve changed and Future DOES affect the past!”