If you are sitting at the next door table, to talk to them, then you're not in line with the idea of not meeting other households.
While I get where you are coming from, I really don't see how it is more of a danger for people who know each other to sit on tables close (2m+ apart) than it would be for the same table to be used by someone else? Am not sure how it could be a problem really. Yes I guess its 'the rules' but common sense would surely say that thats a bloody odd one.
Mary and Joe on table 1
Sally and Frannie on table 2
This is not allowed apparently, and will make the virus spread more. But
Mary and Joe on table one
Bill and Ted sit on table 2 with their 4 kids.
I what world is it 'safer' if the second happens instead of the first? Even assuming same amount of people on each table..
- Mary and Joe
- Sally and Frannie
Very Bad and likely to spread. As these people know each other
- Mary and Joe
- Bill and Ted
Fine and less likely to spread. Because? Kind of nonsensical to me really.
Yes its a 'rule', but surely people don't follow rules that make no logical sense at all, simply because thats the rules?!
You can meet a friend who has blonde hair in your garden, aslong as you stay 2m apart, and only if its on the right side of the garden. The rules say you being on the left hand side instead, while still distancing 2m, poses more of a threat. It is also deemed dangerous to meet a dark haired friend at all, regardless of if its on the right or left side of the garden. Are there really people who would listen to the above (made up, obviously but to make the point) just because its 'the rules'? Or would they see that its a little bit ridiculous. Maybe some would follow that if they were told to, but I cannot really see it?