After years of removing commas, I’ve changed my tune.

As a writer for publications like Wired and other tech outlets, I followed AP style. That means no “Oxford comma.” Instead of “apples, oranges, and bananas,” you must write “apples, oranges and bananas.”

The New York Times and Associated Press both avoid the Oxford comma. Those seemed like authoritative enough sources, so I followed their lead.

Later, I became the editor of ProgrammableWeb. I wanted us consistent, so I became the Oxford comma police.

Then I worked with non-journalists: marketers, product managers, technical writers. And with different style guides.

The arguments for the Oxford comma are compelling:

In AP Style, a founding father becomes a rhino!

And so, I’ve relented. The Oxford comma often adds clarity, prevents confusion, and makes lists easier to read (see!).

Though I’ve embraced the Oxford comma, I don’t care whether you use it or not.

Don’t let style preferences and zealotry get in the way of your message. Clarity and consistency are important. But aim to be pragmatic.

You’ll be unsurprised to know this applies to developer marketing. And it’s about more than how you use your commas.

No single approach works for every technical audience. There’s no “right way,” as long as you have their best interest in mind.

Too often, marketing content is disguised as educational. It declares a single correct path, which is unlikely to resonate with developers.

In ​Why Developers Don’t Trust Your Build vs Buy Guide​, I share three reasons these can come across inauthentic.

But I don’t present one right way, because that doesn’t exist. And I’m no longer going to edit your commas.

Do you have a Build vs Buy to share? Tap reply and I’ll check it out.