Well, I know. I’m agreeing. The point I’m making is that the way I use symbols r

Well, I know. I’m agreeing. The point I’m making is that the way I use symbols requires the domain (Scale) of what I’m discussing. This appears inconsistent but it isn’t. I would need to explain the use of the symbols in each case. If I did that then the pattern would be obvious.
The scale <, > and dependency <-, ->, and capital +,-,=,!= are meta symbols that require the user to ‘do work’. And I am too inconsistent, I agree. Where we disagree is the capital symbols, which is the same as the ternary logic triangle (or diamond if we include !=.
For some reason that doesn’t make sense to you because you interpret it as inconsistent. I haven’t figured out your interpretation – usually it’s more literal than I mean it.