CZ:Charter drafting committee/Position statements/D. Matt Innis

The best way to describe my position is to let you know where I come from. I am a practicing chiropractor in the USA. I was invited to join Citizendium in November 2005 to help author some of the alternative medicine articles here and found the environment very energetic and productive, but had the added advantage of collaborating with very knowledgeable people and getting the Chiropractic article to an approved and stable status (unlike wikipedia). I was later invited to apply as an editor, even though my credentials were not the top in my field. I appreciated the opportunity and accepted. Since then, I took on the role of constable and last year, Assistant to the Chief constable. In fulfilling my role as a Healing Arts editor early on, I had the luxury of working when Citizendium was young. Alternative medicine, by nature, will always be a target for criticism, so any writing naturally required a certain amount of "protection" from those that did not think an encyclopedia should even include such. The constabulary, under those early constables, must have had a heavy duty, which I now appreciate. Once constable, the many people that were working to set us up, were very vocal with ideas while drafting policy. I watched as Larry diligently wrote our policies and commented on conditions and positions and by the time the project was up and running, I think I had a good feel for the roles that each branch was to fill -- authors, editors, EC, EIC, executive, constables, and the proposed judicial. I have spent the last two years enforcing those deliminations. I've tried to be a voice that was fair to all parties according to the powers that were trusted to me as a constable, being wary to keep the constabulary from taking on roles that should be played by editors, or even the EIC. I think that the Charter should be a broad statement of rights and responsibilities of those that are governed. I feel that goals such as re-writing the Neutrality Policy are not realistic for this committee, but it should spell out a democratic process by which these policies can be altered. That includes guiding us in the formation of a judicial branch and deliminate its duties and responsibilities. It should also determine how we will choose those that lead us and set the rules for making amendments to anything we do. Can we do it in four weeks? Sure we can!

Nominees who have accepted

Nominee	Link to position statement
Raymond Arritt	statement
Robert Badgett	statement
Martin Baldwin-Edwards	statement
Howard C. Berkowitz	statement
Stephen Ewen	statement
Shamira Gelbman	statement
D. Matt Innis	statement
Meg Ireland	statement
Russell D. Jones	statement
Brian P. Long	statement
Daniel Mietchen	statement
Tom Morris	statement
Joe Quick	statement
Supten Sarbadhikari	statement
Peter Schmitt	statement
Anthony Sebastian	statement
Drew R. Smith	statement
Ro Thorpe	statement
David E. Volk	statement
Alexander Wiebel	statement