Some are obviously more etiquette-enhanced than others

London's street theatre etiquette - a metaphor in life?

'...where between themselves they drew up a rota of who would perform and when'.

'...the square was not a public space'

'...due to the very public nature of their work'

'Some folks just don't understand the rules'

I'm sorry, but I don't understand a few things here. It's public entertainment but not in a public space. And if there are rules, if not set by those, one presumes, in control of the area, what are they and administered and policed by whom?

Not to excuse the obnoxious and foul-mouthed (I am sure the counter-arguments were purest examples of linguistic and diplomatic rectitude, of which even Mrs. Beckett would have approved) Ozzies, but I do wonder how this does all get sorted out.

It would be sad to discover that some can enjoy more 'etiquette advantage' than others by a cosy arrangement between those who are 'in' and can play the system, to ensure no further others can intrude. One imagines this to be a lucrative patch and attracting new talent regularly so the competition for top slot must be keen.

So what seems to be being achieved here could be seen to be a compromise between potential extremes of hypocritical corruption in the guise of democracy, and outright anarchy.

Bit like ... anything really... today. Assuming satisfactory answers to my few questions, if successful, and barring incidents from foreigners flying (or boating... just ask Mrs B again) into what 'we' think is 'our' territory, it seems a model for future governance.