Using acronymous is not really in my culture since I'm not an english mother tongue, it's fairly common though in the rest of the world and I happend to get used to it. I had to be explained what "RAF" stood for in a project based in London, since for me it was Royal Air Force, but the other BIM Manager on the phone told me it was Raised Access Floor, just to name a funny episode that happend to me not too long ago.
Right now the usage of these "magic words" is spreading also in the AEC industry (here's another one).
If everybody understands these acronymouses, such as BIM, BEP, VCD and so on, and everybody knows precisely what they refer to there's absolutely no problem with using them.
Unfortunately this is not the case for the subtle LOD (Level of Development), which is sad to note that still too many people tend to confuse with level of detail, which is a completely different concept.
I'd say to shift the attention from the model to the results of the analysis that can be performed on a model at the certain time of its development.
LOR Level Of Reliability would measure the reliability of those analysis (in a general kind of way), less people would confuse the terminolgy and the key concepts behind it.
I think at least it is worth a discussion.