I'm a nerd, the first to admit it, so I'll admit enjoyment of columns about heated controversies over grammar. I'll even declare my true colors right up front: I like and use the Oxford comma. Lawyers mostly don't, so I've never been in the habit of quarreling over it when riding herd on vast swarms of lawyers all collaborating on the drafting of documents that can go into the thousands of pages. All that ever was particularly important to me was that we pick a rule, any rule, and then try to stick to it throughout the document. Which comma rule? I decline to argue the point, or the choice between "data is" and "data are." Actually, the Nate Silver piece adopts the view that surely makes the most sense: take a poll.
Now, who would have thought that the Oxford comma would win the linked poll? General reading suggests that it's almost dropped out of common use, something of interest--per the article--only to people passionate enough about grammar that they're willing to describe themselves as "expert."
You might describe me as a language atavist. I rarely split an infinitive in writing, or even dangle a participle, and I still make the distinction between "may" and "might" that has almost completely disappeared from modern English. I haven't yet taken up the craze for "zhir" or "zhwangi" or whatever it is, and I'm really grumpy about the kids on my lawn, or I would be if I had a lawn and there were any kids within a mile or so.