[tzs]

The bigger tragedy is that there isn't even a good reason to argue over whether or not Oxford commas should be used.

People think there is a good reason, namely that there are some lists that are ambiguous with the comma that are made non-ambiguous by removing it.

However, as far as I've been able to tell, in all such lists the ambiguity is there because there are commas in the sentence serving to mark appositive phrases. If dashes were used instead of commas for the appositive phrase, then the presence of an Oxford comma in the list would not cause ambiguity.

I've seen several writing guides that recommend using dashes for appositive phrases when there are other commas in the sentence. All we have to do is remember to do that (or better always use dashes for appositive phrases), and then it will never be ambiguous (as far as I know) to use the Oxford comma but may be ambiguous to not use it, and so always using the Oxford comma would become the only sane choice.

There was a discussion of this a few months ago here on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16345138

[WhompingWindows]

Isn't there a good reason in this case:

Beer, Drinking Water and Fish

Beer, Drinking Water, and Fish

[tzs]

I meant that there isn't a good reason to argue about them, not that there isn't a good reason to use them.

I'm arguing that if we deal with the true source of ambiguity when lists are used, the use of commas to offset appositive phrases, that eliminates that cases where including the Oxford comma introduces ambiguity, without removing the cases where omitting the Oxford comma causes ambiguity, and so there would then no longer be a good reason to argue against the Oxford comma.

[hammock]

Assuming a good writer, then no, because if parallel construction was adhered to then there can only be one meaning of "drinking water "