Is “different Queues” sufficient enough to describe no two of the same Queue? I’m just wondering if this could be made more clear to avoid confusion or rule-twisting, unless you want to leave room for that of course. ;-)

I don’t see either that argument being taken too seriously given the current wording or a clean way to word it that’s more explicit. But perhaps that’s my author’s blind spot.

Based on Kevan’s reading of the current rule that you’re trying to replace, I think it would help to be more explicit here. Otherwise, “different Queues” could simply mean at least 1 Visitor in a different Queue than the other 3, or 2-and-2, and so on.