I'm not bothered by your post! Genuinely. I find it takes all types, and if there's a way I can improve to be better understood, that's a language win for me. I level up when corrected.
>When one becomes frustrated with the way a policy or guideline is being applied, it may be tempting to try to discredit the rule or interpretation thereof by, in one's view, applying it consistently. Sometimes, this is done simply to prove a point in a local dispute. In other cases, one might try to enforce a rule in a generally unpopular way, with the aim of getting it changed.
You're trying to apply prescriptivism consistently to the point of absurdity. In turn this causes you to reply to people who hold genuine views with a bad faith exaggerated offense at punctuation, just so you can illustrate your point, and that turns a genuine discussion into a something much less interesting.
In wiki culture, they call this POINT-y behavior: Taking rules too far in bad faith just to prove a point. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:POINT)
TL;DR: Please don't do that, it makes the discussion very annoying!
You have several comma splices, just as many missing commas, some dubious capitalisation and a missing full stop or two. I personally find sloppy punctuation offensive but I don’t usually point it out. How do /you/ handle being corrected? These rules change a lot less often than once a decade.
Now, you may not like prescriptivist grammar, but if you don’t, I’d like to see how you justify one form of prescriptivism and not another.
And if you don’t like how I picked on your choice of a single word in your post: That is the behaviour you’re defending.