I only eat regular hot dogs.

You're missing out then.

I know that one's not really a typo or a grammatical mistake, but I snuck it in anyway.

ETA Maybe it was, on second thought! The sign writer might have meant:

Diesel hot dogs are the new fashion rage.

Grammar freaks, I have a question. My Mom has been using the word "irregardless" a lot lately for some weird reason and it is annoying the hell out of me. What's the difference between irregardless and regardless? They're essentially the same, right?

I feel like this was a plant put here to unify us after the oh v. zero debacle.

Here's the invaluable Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Style, AKA "Garner's":

I prefer premium hot dogs.

I learned it long before I ever posted on 2+2.

So, my Mom is a dolt. Thank you!

I saw this and immediately thought it was another mindless error, but it was in an upscale restaurant after all...apparently there is a vegan animal-friendly alternative.

I only eat unleaded ones.

They put it in quotation marks, so you shouldn't have looked twice.

I think the quotes are fine here because it calls out the coined name and indicates that they didn't just misspell foie gras.

Dude, I hear you're leaving the cover sheet off your TPS reports.

On run on sentences:

They had meatballs on sale at the store, so I bought a pound.

or;

They had meatballs on sale at the store. I bought a pound.

Is the comma in the first example superfluous?

Does starting a sentence with "So...", when "So" indicates "the result:", make the sentence incomplete without the cause clause? Is "so" governed by the same rules as "and" or "but"? I really dislike sentences that start with "and" or "but", unless it's by a second party who is interjecting, interrupting, or continuing a thought that has been presented by the first party.

I don't see why that comma would be superfluous. It's inserting a pause and creating an opening for a new subject and predicate. I would use the comma every time.

Which your examples weren't.

"[Independent clause], [coordinating conjunction] [independent clause]" is the standard, but sometimes you can drop the comma for rhythm/voice reasons.

No.

In general, yes.

I thought that maybe the one without a comma would be a run on. Also I wanted to lead into my next example without the post getting out of hand:

When you go to the store, you need to bring money and you have to wear clothes, because you won't be allowed to buy anything if you don't.

When you go to the store, you need to bring money and you have to wear clothes. ("This is" is implied) Because you won't be allowed to buy anything if you don't.

I think the first is a run on, but I like it better than the second. Because now I'm using "because" to start the sentence when I feel that if I'm going to make it a compound sentence, then the "because" should be in the same sentence as the "why". But when speaking, there is nothing to indicate where the current sentence ends. Or where the next sentence begins, besides a pause in speech. When creating a sentence out of our imagination, nobody has said it yet. So there's nothing to tell us which sentence should be compounded except the conjunction "itself".

In before, "But Bob, "itself" is not a conjunction!!"

Run-on sentence has a specific meaning, and it doesn't refer to all sentences that are long or have a lot going on or anything like that. That's a common misconception.

You can prefer the first (the standard way to write it) for many reasons, but the idea that the "because" must be in the same sentence as the "why," which I'm getting the sense you believe, shouldn't be one of those reasons.

I'm quick to rush into the waiting arms of the semicolon when I feel sentences getting too long.

The first example does feel crowded, but the second one isn't an option (in my opinion) because counting on "This is" to be implied leaves you with, "Because you won't be allowed to buy anything if you don't," which isn't a sentence.

Some alternatives:

(As LKJ suggested. I too am a semicolon addict.)

I'd even eliminate either "have to" or "need to," which might help ease that "run on" feeling you're getting (which, as Toothy said, is just a sentence with a lot going on in it):

"Now" you're "talking."

Basically what I'm looking for is the longest, correctly constructed sentence without a semicolon, colon, adjective, adverb, or any type of ridiculously long noun or prepositional phrase.

Challenge!!

1. The period goes inside the quotes if you are American.

2. I believe that the inner quotes should be like 'this.'