How is the back-it-up policy going to evolve after the new Code of Conduct?

Question

Soon, the new Code of Conduct will replace the Be Nice policy.

From what I read in the document, there are several points in the new text that are contrasting with the recently introduced "back-it-up policy", but more than the policy itself, the way it's currently enforced. Some relevant quotes (emphasis mine):

• Our mission is to build an inclusive community where all people feel welcome and can participate
• join us in building a learning community that is rooted in kindness, collaboration, and mutual respect
• It applies to everyone using the Stack Exchange network, including our team, moderators

Premise and observations

Meta contains several posts that suggest (possibly mis)using the website tools to address content that is not "backed up":

• A killer combination of downvotes + flags + comments:

  unsupported answers can and should be downvoted, flagged as NAA, and commented

  This would be too much for an answer that is "intentionally" not backed up (I highly doubt people intentionally do that, but who knows?) let alone for the answer of someone that simply forgot to do that and corrects it later on.

• A post notice, which is really a tool that is supposed to be used for warning about serious misconduct in answering.

There are also some other issues, it seems:

• There has not been a strong agreement about what is enough to be considered backed up, see also:

  • I'm confused about the "back it up" policy

  • Can we let adequate explanation be an alternative to "Backing it up"?

    I'd say answers that are not based on personal experience or references should be allowed, as long as: [...]

• Anyone could claim "it happened to me before and it worked" even if it isn't true.

• The policy is inconsistently enforced, partly because most of the strongest enforcement actions occur after someone flags and not every answer gets flagged.

• This leads to some users thinking it's unfair that they are threatened of deletion and at the same time others "get away" with it.

Question(s)

Is the back-it-up policy and the way it is enforced going to stay the same with the new Code of Conduct? Is anything going to change in order to comply with the new CoC, to adhere to a welcoming attitude and to strive for fairness in the moderation process?

Short personal opinion

IPS is the only website on the network where I started to feel really unwelcome and midly uncomfortable for how some other users were treated as well. Despite having a single highly received (and backed up) answer I have decided to stop answering while the situation remains this much uncertain.

There are examples (1) (2) of stunning answers that (according to current policy) should be deleted. IMHO the first thing to care about is the content quality, then site policy should be at the second place. But I digress.

Answer 1

Since you called out my answer as not backed up, let me say very clearly that I think you're wrong: it is backed up, and is a better answer for it (the first version wasn't.) The section in italics that starts "Look what happens when you make that mental change" and goes to " gives you the tools to make it easy to tell her" explains why the approach here works.

Back it up doesn't have to be "I tried this once and here's what happened." It just has to explain why the suggestion is likely to be a good one. If my answer had stopped after the first paragraph and just added "so tell her and you'll be fine" it wouldn't have been backed up.

This whole question feels a little to me like concern trolling. "Oh noes, this stunning answer is going to fall foul of a policy I don't like! We should probably get rid of the policy eh?" Since you may not have the rep to see vote splits, I can tell you that answer has no downvotes. Mods have visited it repeatedly to clear away comments, and none have left a comment of their own asking for backup, nor has a notice been added. You're "worrying" about something that doesn't need that concern. I am sorry you feel unwelcome, I wouldn't want anybody to, but this isn't the way to solve what you see to be a problem.

Answer 2

I'm not seeing any reason that filtering for quality has to be done in a rude way.

The subject has been beaten to death on Meta.SE and Meta.SO already, but we might as well have the conversation here with regards to our specific site and community.

Being polite, nice, and welcoming is not at odds with requiring quality.

The rules aren't inherently unwelcoming. It's just a matter of how those rules are enforced. As long as comments requesting that an answer be backed up are polite and constructive there's no conflict.

To use an analogy... In most, well probably all, places stealing/theft is against the law. Some people obviously don't get caught stealing, but "hey all of those other people got away with it" isn't a defense in court. This isn't a matter of the law being unjust or being applied unfairly, it's just a matter of some people slipping through the cracks because there isn't always a police officer watching.

Police officers are required to enforce the law. When they see someone stealing they have to address the situation. This isn't inherently rude or unwelcoming, they're just doing their jobs. But... Well, there's a world of difference between, "Excuse me citizen, I saw that, you'll have to come with me." And excessive force like drawing a weapon or wrestling someone to the ground immediately over petty theft.

What makes the enforcement of a rule rude, or unwelcoming, isn't really about having rules or not having rules. It's about the way we enforce those rules.

By far, the majority of comments requesting that answers be backed up tend to be pretty polite. Some are perhaps a little terse, but I don't think I've seen these cross into rude yet.

"I feel unwelcome because I don't like the rules" isn't really a great way to start a conversation about changing, or removing, the rules. Obviously, a thief will feel unwelcome when there's a police officer watching for thieves. On the other hand, "I had to steal bread to feed my family, because of these systemic problems..." may be a good way to start a conversation about dealing with some of those systemic problems. This approach acknowledges that the rule is probably there for good reasons, but that someone was reduced to breaking the rules for reasons that need to be addressed.

That leads me to say, contribute. Answer questions to the best of your ability. If someone comments in a rude way asking for back up, or you see a clear pattern of abuse in the way the rule is enforced, bring the enforcement up here on meta. If you find backing up your answers to be difficult, take some time to read answers that appear to be backed up well and take note of the how they did it.