[The Toddler]

Thanks. I personally would probably agree with all but the last, which still seems ambiguous to me. I do think the context in which these acronyms are used are important.

But for the last one not to be Mossad he would have to change the meaning of what he has previously posted. So MOS would mean Mossad in some instances while meaning something else in others. That is a bad interpretive scheme. Let Q interpret Q. This would mean that in light of other instances there is strong evidence that MOS means Mossad unless countervailing evidence exists.

[SteveH]

OK, but is Q’s lexicon an exclusively 1-1 correlation?

I am dimly recalling that we had no such guarantee, at least in the past.

There is a q lexicon online but I am a bit fearful to post it lest i trip over some fr rule. It does not appear to contain “MOS.” I recall a FR lexicon in the past but I can no longer find it in a quick search (i do believe i can recall who maintained it in the past but that may not help, at least on short notice).