As much as I hate disagreeing with Romero's suggestions (or anyone who has that nice a smile), he's off base about the signage and -- UGH! -- a uniformed police presence.

A public restroom isn't a place for public sex, particularly when the solicitation codes and practices of the toilet trade involve invading the necessarily (and temporarily) private space (in a public place) of a locked bathroom stall. The community shouldn't have to expend resources on signage or authoritarian enforcement of common-sense etiquette.

If the toilet trade is so abundant at the locale that Craig chose that a uniformed cop would be necessary, than Craig's story becomes even more hootingly ridiculous than it already is. If the trade is so rare and arcane that a sting is unwarranted then the signs wouldn't be necessary and stings called for based on the increased number of complaints.

Approaching this from an etiquette standpoint bending over backwards to excuse extremes, why not post signs asking people to refrain from upending crippled children in the rush to have one's whiz? Or a notice telling pet owners not to submerge critters' heads in the toilets in hot weather cause it could damage both critter and toilet, and impede other users' access to clean, hairball-free facilities?