Remember when the neo-pronoun thing landed on:

co/cos
e/em/eir
e/em/es
hu/hum
ne/nem
ne/nir
per/per
s/he/hir
thon/thons
ve/ver
vi/vir
vi/vim
zhe/zher

I'm all for being inclusive and a completionist. But the community had to learn the difference between what belongs in academic and reference litterature, and what belongs in casual conversation. A well intentioned idea was badly introduced to the public causing blowback and faned the flames of the culture wars and energized the maga chuds. It's weakness was not its specificity. It was trying to start at the end and forcing the language everybody's been learning since birth to be rewritten. It's unweildy.

To your exact point. Naming each group IS important. Specificity and identity has a power of its own. Let the acronym grow! But know where it belongs. This is already past the point of needing a shorter simpler umbrella term for conversation and is going into reference material.

When even your allies are getting tripped up, it's time to rethink and pivot.