Both Trisher and Suzie are making valid points in actual fact. Suzie has said she agrees with the essence of the rule of six, if not the actual number, and Trisher has said she doesn’t agree with the rule of six but will follow it, and it appears that both posters are applying all the guidelines where necessary.
My thoughts are that the rule of six will penalise many families all over the country because if a couple have three children, then they can never, in the foreseeable future, actually meet together indoors or outdoors, with their grandparents. One parent, or one grandparent will need to absent themselves, so there are only six. But when the grandparent goes home, or the family return to the family home where the other other parent is, then any virus that might be present, will be potentially spread to the person who absented themselves. Not rocket science is it? And therefore not a very sensible rule, particularly when six people from different households can now meet together indoors, and those six people could be three couples, bringing the chances of infection up.