As you all know by now, someone calling himself “skipturner” thought he had unmasked the elusive xPraetorius. However, as you also know, unmasking xPraetorius is simply not possible — literally not possible — for a bunch of very commonsensical reasons, about which I won’t elaborate because if you’ve been paying attention, you know why.
However, since people in very, very high places keep very close tabs on our blog, I think I need to set some things straight.
Here’s “skipturner’s” post in a reply to our “About” page:
You are quite the bitter, unhappy man. xPraetorius, for someone that prides himself on his intelligence, you aren’t very good at hiding your true identity–ARTHUR SEERY!
Thing one: I most decidedly do not pride myself on my intelligence. xPraetorius is a very humble man; even when referring to himself in the third person. 🙂
Thing two: Since I’ve never heard of “Arthur Seery,” I took the trouble to google the name and got back really only one entry on the first page of results. It’s for a guy who appears to be the one to whom “skipturner” is referring. Here’s why: Arthur Seery has a cool beard. “Skip” said somewhere that “Arthur Seery” has a cool beard. Arthur Seery plays the guitar and has posted quite a number of videos on YouTube. Arthur appears also to favor Ovation guitars…the famous “roundbacks” designed by Charles Kaman (also the founder of Kaman Aerospace, and Fidelco Guide Dogs, by the way!).
Well, the aforementioned affection for Ovation guitars, and the fact that I’m a man, appear to be the only things I have in common with this Arthur Seery dude. Being a dude and having an affection for Ovation guitars puts me in with a group of several millions of other men. Hardly the thing on which to base “skipturner’s” conclusion.
Anyway, I’m not Arthur Seery.
Thing three: It’s important that “skipturner’s” erroneous conclusion not have any negative repercussions for this Arthur Seery fellow. Those who are reading this post, know to whom I’m speaking. It’s entirely possible that “skipturner” could cause real harm to someone not at all affiliated with this think tank.
To our readers: Please don’t try to get through our veil of anonymity. First, you won’t be able to. Our anonymity is as close to perfectly protected as it can be. It’s very, very low-tech, and therefore not traceable through technology. Even if you were to sit over my shoulder as I type this, you’d be clueless as to who writes for us, and even as to who xPraetorius really is. Even with the hints that we have sprinkled throughout our posts.
Second: like “skipturner,” you risk causing real harm to innocent people. I know that the left largely doesn’t care about that — in fact, they prefer harming the harmless…less risk that way to themselves! — but I’ll make the plea for common decency anyway.
Why else not pierce our anonymity? Simple: ’cause we don’t want you to. If you want to remain anonymous in the things you do, then as long as you aren’t harming anyone, neither I, nor anyone in this think tank, would even consider exposing you. That’s just polite. Note: Most bloggers are looking for fame and/or notoriety. We’re not. At least not yet. I don’t expect the left ever to engage in basic politeness or courtesy, but I never give up asking them to.
We traffic in ideas here at The Praetorian Writers’ Group. If your ideas can’t compete with ours, then maybe you should consider challenging and rethinking your ideas. If you take this sensible course of action, your next step should be to thank us for exposing weaknesses in your thinking. The very last thing you should consider is to try to expose someone who has no desire to be exposed. Duh!
One last thing, maybe the most important thing: It’s notable that “skipturner,” apparently became upset at xPraetorius for our views on “gay marriage.”
Here’s a snippet from his WordPress Page that seems to be the only page he’s posted:
In October of last year a Connecticut blogger that goes by the name xPraetorius decided that he was going to “come out” as a straight man in the great state of Connecticut. His post gives the impression that xPraetorious feels besieged by all of the homosexuals in his midst. The moving piece can be found here. Most of his other posts strike similar themes about the persecution of white, heterosexual males in Connecticut. Thankfully, as a white, heterosexual male in Connecticut I have yet to come face to face with the pitchfork wielding hordes that he fears.
Ironically, this kind of confirms our conclusion that things and people “gay” wield a hugely disproportionate power, and occupy a vastly disproportionate share of mind in today’s society, merely because they don’t do sex in the normal way. Let’s face it: there’s no other reason for which they think they deserve special consideration by society.
And because instead of normal sex, gays really engage in elaborate masturbation, they have received a special marriage dispensation that effectively legislates away the very concept of marriage itself.
Let’s not forget: gays represent less than 1% of all Americans! We re-defined a vital civilization-wide cornerstone for less than 1% of the people, whose sole reason for hijacking this vital component of society is the odd things they do with their sexual apparatus.
“Skip” says that: “Most of his [xPraetorius’] other posts strike similar themes about the persecution of white, heterosexual males in Connecticut”
First: while we address racial issues frequently here, never have I ever, not even once, suggested that as a white person I’m persecuted in Connecticut.
Second: while we address feminism quite a lot in these pages, never, have I ever, not even once, suggested that as a male I’m persecuted in Connecticut.
Third: my satirical post did suggest that Connecticut is a namby-pamby, lefty state, thoroughly cowed in the face of political correctness as it pertains to talking about things gay. I’d suggest further that this is not remotely a controversial conclusion.
Fourth: Here is, again — ** sigh ** eyeroll! — that ubiquitous and tiresome characteristic of the left: They disagree with you, so not only are you wrong, but you’re also vaguely evil — racist, sexist and all the rest. Note: there’s no mention whatsoever of race in my post. I guess “skipturner” can be forgiven for thinking I’m white. I did post a picture (actually a picture cribbed from an online modeling site somewhere) of “myself” looking definitely white. However, “skip” really doesn’t know the color of my skin, since that’s not me. So, in reality, “skip” should actually address the issues. You know, the things I wrote?
Anyone who has been paying attention knows that pace “skip,” “gay issues” have occupied only a tiny portion — not even close to most — of the attention of our think tank. We have paid much more attention to leftist corruption and chicanery in America, the world and history. Yes, gay rights and leftist villainy are closely related, but we are only a half-dozen or so writers, and can’t cover all topics at once. So, we do what we can with the time we have. 🙂
Anyway, I wanted to clear all that up.
Nota bene: “Skipturner” actually did me a favor; I’d been meaning to do an update to our “About” page for some time now. I wrote the original “About” page when we were only two writers. We quickly signed up several others, and needed to put together written documentation of our mission, our processes and procedures.
The beauty of a blog is that you can just go out there and write…Before launching Praetori, I did a bit more, in putting together a “foundational premise” — the anonymity thing, as well as strict editorial control by one person — me — who would take input from the rest. Those who wanted (or want) to sign on, are required to agree to those conditions, or else we thank them politely for their interest and turn them away.
I have another blog (not linked here, naturally) that is not anonymous. It can be very liberating to be anonymous, so I like both blogs quite a bit.
For those who sign on with us here at Praetori, there is extraordinary freedom of expression, with the single caveat that I have to approve the post before it goes out there. I have to be okay with the post’s conclusions, and with the way the writer has expressed those conclusions. Numerous times I’ve had ummm… “spirited” meetings with contributors whom I have required to defend their offerings. Some of those pieces have made it to our pages, some have not. Many have made it only after extensive re-write.
You might think all this indicates that we don’t have much freedom of expression here. To the contrary! It means only that we are a Conservative blog. We are not interested in publishing lefty blog entries. That’s all.
— xPraetorius (yep, really me…this time)