As for being certain, I'm certain the above wordy razzle-dazzle cites a questionable option as the basic rule. Even if one were to accept the on-line source, the two previous rules cite the rules which are always correct, not an option dependent on an arbitrary definition of "short main clauses."
The bogus argument remains a perfect example of the straw man ploy.
Yep, it is a good idea to be certain people are wrong before telling them they are.
Ok, I'll break it down Barney-style for ya.
First, is it safe to assume by "ploy" that you meant fallacy or did you actually think I set out and designed a ploy of some kind? This is what the straw man fallacy is:
"
Straw Man Fallacy Explanation
A straw man argument is one that misrepresents a position in order to make it appear weaker than it actually is, refutes this misrepresentation of the position, and then concludes that the real position has been refuted. This, of course, is a fallacy, because the position that has been claimed to be refuted is different to that which has actually been refuted; the real target of the argument is untouched by it.
Example
(1) Trinitarianism holds that three equals one.
(2) Three does not equal one.
Therefore:
(3) Trinitarianism is false.
This is an example of a straw man argument because its first premise misrepresents trinitarianism, its second premise attacks this misrepresentation of trinitarianism, and its conclusion states that trinitarianism is false. Trinitarianism, of course, does not hold that three equals one, and so this argument demonstrates nothing concerning its truth."
Keeping THAT definition in mind, please, have a look again at what I said and what you responded with. I said:
"The rules are none but an outfit that you place on a King. Consider something like this; the rules state that you do NOT have to put a comma in this sentence: "I like to eat oranges and midgets like to eat donuts." When you read this, the first seven words you read put an unpleasant image into your mind, right? Then you have to "correct" the image as you realize that I do not like to eat midgets, but that midgets like to eat donuts. The question is, really, which rules you will adhere to, bend, or break, in order to give your reader the most desirable path through your story (which is usually the cleanest, clearest path... readers, as you know, get exhausted when they are always having to make mental corrections. A book is supposed to provide an experience, whether for escape or learning, and is not supposed to be hard labor for the mind)."
then you responded:
"Sorry, Splendad, you built a straw man to attack. The rule for your example sentence is clear and exact: Its sentence construction
requires a comma after oranges, because a main clause follows the first main clause. The rule isn't only for trick sentences; it's for ease in reading
all compound sentences."
First, there is nothing even
remotely related to a straw man fallacy in what I said. Seriously.
Secondly, you're just wrong. Do you not want to believe you're wrong? Do you want to believe that, in fact, a comma really is required between two simple independent clauses? Well, there's nothing I can do about that, but I'll be damned if I'll let you mislead writers on this board who are looking for information that they can use and not illusions.
If you're going to tell somebody they are wrong, for GAWD'S sake, be right!
EDIT: Just wanted to add this from
http://www.suite101.com/content/punctuating-compound-sentences-a65463:
Also, American and British grammar are moving toward less sentence punctuation (especially in casual, journalism, and internet writing) for easier reading. For short compound sentences that cannot be misunderstood, omitting the comma is okay. This is especially true in cases where the first clause of the compound sentence is short.
CORRECT:
Jamal threw a snowball at me but I ducked in time.
Jonah gathered his books but the bus had already left by the time he reached the bus stop.
INCORRECT:
Jamal threw a snowball at me from the fort in the front of the yard but I ducked in time.
The first part of the above compound sentence does not reach the conjunction until almost the end of the sentence, so a comma should be used before but.
Use your own judgment when writing compound sentences, and if in doubt of whether a sentence should include a comma with the conjunction, include the comma. It is rare that a true compound sentence could be considered incorrect with a comma before the conjunction.
