You may remember this from a couple of summers ago. The original has gone 404, so the link comes back here:
When I first began working here, only one of the four writers in my department consistently used the serial comma. The other three would accept my edits when I imposed it onto their writing, but they kept sending me drafts in which it was omitted.
So I decided to make evangelizing the serial comma my personal mission. I explained to them why the serial comma was the superior choice for clarity. I wrote the classic “To my parents, Ayn Rand and God” example on their whiteboards to demonstrate why omitting it was confusing. I complained about how I can’t tell how many items are in a list if I’m unfamiliar with the terms and they don’t use the serial comma.
The serial comma was also referred to as the “Oxford comma,” but even Oxford is disowning it:
As a general rule, do not use the serial/Oxford comma: so write ‘a, b and c’ not ‘a, b, and c’. But when a comma would assist in the meaning of the sentence or helps to resolve ambiguity, it can be used especially where one of the items in the list is already joined by ‘and’: They had a choice between croissants, bacon and eggs, and muesli.
I suppose it’s better than Spam, egg, sausage and Spam.
The following dialogue took place on the original poster’s Facebook page:
O.P.: They can have my Oxford/serial comma when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Wiseguy (not I): You mean cold, dead, hands?
O.P.: No, it would have to be something like cold, dead, and pedantic hands.
Holy position reversal, Batmanglij!