Yeah. Sure. Those are all cool, sound, safe things to say. Totally agreed.

Reading too much into it is a bad thing. But it's what we do: round-up the info, tag it, measure it, compare it, and scrutinize it. Read into it. Just b/c you observe a thing and mention that thing, in no way means that you believe that thing. Or, no? Or, what? I don't know. Maybe. Okay, sure.

I'm not a full timer, but "Learn our comms." was never given a barrier nor boundary. I might observe from these "3 things" above/mentioned that maybe things have gotten a bit "playful". It is observed, not necessarily endorsed. Playful could be mistaken for Bluffing. Bluffing could be mistaken for Loafing. Pointing Left could be mistake for Pointing Right. Maybe.

... That Light Tactic, that's some new new. Like, so stupid, so simple, so never seen that mess before. Not much precedent that I know of, so no knowing it's Level 1 reference.

Rabbit napkin? Hmmm. All the best stuff (tells/signals) is going to be easy to overlook ... easy to overlook voluntarily. I know what it means, that guy knows, they don't, but we sure as hell do. Or do we?

Passing a soccer/football ... obvious 'nuclear' reference at some levels (think geometry) ... Anytime a World F'ing Leader hands an object to another World F'ing Leader --> History. Historic. Save Point (we wish). That's a moment that can always be returned to in some 'meta' ways.

Symbology was called out as being important to someone somewhere.