I'm still not completely sure about Q but perhaps it would help if I gave you something else to associate with the statements these people make the next time they show up:
Think of the 1962 movie "The Longest Day" where the BBC during WWII sent coded messages to the French resistance.
"John has a long mustache."
"There is fire at the travel agency."
These messages were specific instructs to different french resistant groups to carry out operations prior to the D-Day invasion to increase the chances of success.
To the Germans it was BS, gibberish, nuttery, etc. and was dismissed. Imagine if the resistance ignored the messages and failed to do there part what would the world look like today?
This is what drives me to at least take a look at what the Q posts are trying to say. These people ask Q to spell it out in plan english but they fail to understand why its coded.
The BBC in WWII didn't radio "Jacque gather your people and blow up the railroad outside the city to prevent supplies to the Normandy coast. NO, they said:
Wound my heart with a monotonous languor
Wow! Interesting. I do feel that Q drops are conveying a lot more information to many more audience groups than we know.
WELL PUT. Amen!
That is one of the things that I have found so fascinating about the whole body of Q posts, that they seem to have multiple (and sometimes overlapping) purposes.
Putting your suggestion at the top, I see so far:
- coded directives for certain actors
- disinformation for other actors
- questions, to get people THINKING
- topics, some of them quite old and well understood (by folks like FReepers, for quite some time), that are now being injected into conversations within the larger populace (not widespread at the moment, but certainly more so than 3 or 4 months ago)
- "cheerleading" to lift the spirits of the long oppressed
- exhortations to spread the news (and the Word, in some cases)
- a form of a "rally point" that brings together a rather broad spectrum of people that may not normally interact, and the synergies that develop from good healthy conversations amongst folks of good intentions that may see things from slightly (or vastly!) different perspectives...
I'm sure that there are other aspects that I have missed.
When looking at the body of the Q posts as a whole, there does seem to be an amazing amount of internal consistency and textual integrity over time. (Certainly not 100%, at least based upon what we can 'know' at the present time, but a healthy amount.)
It seems of late that some of the Q materials are headed into a more multi-media format (videos, pictures, links to external publications, etc.), this may be to appeal to a broader segment of the population that has taken several weeks to start digging themselves, to look for themselves at what all this "Q stuff" is that I am hearing about...
Fascinating, to say the least!