I just explained why the Oxford comma doesn’t fix this possible ambiguity, especially when the list item is singular. The item that follows can be read as modifying with the Oxford comma (and less so without) when the item is singular, as it is here.

The list seems clear to me either way. This way makes it possible to read “a lavish legal drama” as a description of Frankenstein.

I'm commenting on how absurd it is that people are using computer programs that make up sources in a piece of writing — whereas if a hired human writer/editor ever made up a source (to fluff up a piece of writing, to make it look or sound better) that person would be fired for their dishonesty.

Not verifying is very different is very different than making up a reference that doesn’t exist because you think it looks good. If an editor I hired did that, I wouldn’t hire them again.

How many discovered made-up/hallucinated references would it take before a human copyeditor would be fired? (My guess, for most employers/clients, would be only one.)

“Without the chance to develop these capacities, young people would not be able to understand a news report, medical documents and consent forms or the merit of an argument... A depleted conceptual reservoir would render our lives crude and our experience of the world undifferentiated and coarse.”

I want a real address to which to send a post by post, none of this cyberspace business

Reskeet is really odd. I would prefer a generic multi-platform term, like repost and quote-post. Who's in charge of this, send me their address so I can mail them my request

Sound system will indeed bring me back up. That's one thing that I can depend on.

OK definitely the same guy. I assumed he’d have retired. Love the glass brick.

Yup! Though there were possibly others on Dougall with the same vibe. Hilarious.

Did we have the same orthodontist

Growing up dreaming of one day living in Russell Woods