This is swimming upstream given the progress of the thread, but I loved this.
It's an opinionated style guide. If you disagree, that's of course fine - and part of the reason I liked it, I suspect, was that it fits well with my own idiolect - but there's a distinction to be drawn between language (non-prescriptive) and style (which you can be as prescriptive about as you like).
One of the best aspects of the Economist is its style; both of its prose and its design. Its politics I can take or leave, but at least it's honest about where it stands.
It's an opinionated style guide. If you disagree, that's of course fine - and part of the reason I liked it, I suspect, was that it fits well with my own idiolect - but there's a distinction to be drawn between language (non-prescriptive) and style (which you can be as prescriptive about as you like).
One of the best aspects of the Economist is its style; both of its prose and its design. Its politics I can take or leave, but at least it's honest about where it stands.