People come to this site seeking knowledge about history. To turn someone away solely based on the notion that their question covers ground that has been contaminated by conspiracy theorists is (imho) a poor philosophy. So merely involving a conspiracy theory should not be, by itself, criteria for closing. They are after all part of history.
On the other hand, as we know conspiracy theories only persist through willful ignorance of fact, reason, and science, on which our historical knowledge and study is based on, just like every other discipline. So if the person asking the question is also willfully ignorant of these things, there is nothing we can do for them and should either close the question or, at best, flag it for migration to Skeptics (which I currently feel should be criteria for a predefined migration path via close vote, but it's still too early to tell that for sure).
We should expect SOME crossover between Skeptics and this; that is no different than most sites having some crossover. Some sites (consider Unix/Linux and Ubuntu and Server Fault) have a considerable amount of crossover. I expect this and Skepetics to have some crossover and we will simply have to deal with that.
The best thing we can do to move forward is to establish clear, well defined answers to 7MQ. This question says "Can we safely assume these do not belong on the site in any form? I'm mainly looking for support here in closing such questions quickly and discouraging their asking." I would counter this by asking these questions:
- "How should we define a conspiracy question?"
- "How should we define an off topic conspiracy question?"
- "How should we distinguish between off topic conspiracy questions to close and those to migrate?"
- "How does Skeptics.SE handle conspiracy questions and what can we learn from their experience?"
I think answering these questions will help us greatly in maintaining our objectivity while handing this (and other) delicate topics.