>
, no one dies if you split an infinitive, so if it sounds better to you, why avoid it because someone decided it was a rule? I was given to understand - many years ago, from what source I cannot now remember, that the "rule" about split infinitives dates back to the late 18th early 19th century or when the written language was being codified in a fairly systematic fashion (to do with increased literacy levels, I think) and Latin was used as a bench mark. The argument is that, as Latin has no split infinitive, then nor should English.
This of course, ignores the fact that Latin infinitives are single words.
I totally agree with William - there are times when it is much more effective (therefore efficient and efficacious?) to split the infinitive to give emphasis, punch or whatever. What I do object to is sentences where the writer has been so ill-advised as to, although with good intention and a wish to be clear and concise, split his/her infinitive with more that a couple of words.
Thanks to AnnaStrophic for advice on colo(u)rs, emoticons, etc 
