What exactly constitutes a good vs. bad conspiracy theory?
I would say that any theory that relies primarily, and especially solely on the below "work in progress list" is probably, Bad.
Now, bear in mind the claim of the theory itself could actually be true.
I mean, even crazy people can hit on some truths, but have nothing but gibberish and delusions as supporting evidence.
The point is the crazy person is not going to convince anyone else of the true claim if they are trafficking in evidence, arguments, and speculations that isn't going to help the claim.
Obviously, the criteria below, are tentative, experimental and open to debate, modification, and additional entries.
And if others have time to put in what they think is the criteria for a Good conspiracy theory, that would be great.
Again, I don't think a theory is bad just for having any or all of the below, it is just when they rely primarily or solely on the below as argument or evidence to prove or convince that the theory is correct. Nor is this to dissuade people from gut feelings or speculation. I've had a shady feeling about Tony Scott's death, but knowing all I have to explore it would be some form of the below, I haven't proposed anything. But that doesn't mean it has stopped me from wondering.
1. Numerology.
I think numerology is interesting and mathematically there are probably numerous cycles and rhythms that effect, influence and cause untold number of events which can/could possibly be expressed mathematically. But you can do anything with dates and numbers, especially once you start piling on operations and assigning meaning to certain numbers, 3 means this, 7 means this, etc. Yes, numbers do have meaning, even culturally assigned ones, that probably influence things and how people interpret things but I think a conspiracy theory that relies on a combination of assigning meaning and doing numerous orders of operation to massage dates, addresses or other numbers involved in an event or related to a person is building a weak theory.
2. Evidence of things not seen.
Many theories build a case by hammering away on something that can't be unproven because "it is hidden". An example would be something like the missing double twin. So and so, had a twin who dies at birth. Or does he? So every reported uncharacteristic behavior, every sudden change in weight in a photo, every bad haircut in a photo, is example of the hidden twin being trotted out. Or a better, more lame, example would be so and so is really a reptilian overlord who has scaly lizard legs, which we never see because he never wears shorts. This can be extrapolated where the conspiracy is so airtight because the very existence of the perpetuators and their crimes are all unseen, unknowable excepting one or two dimensional or tactical breadcrumbs to build a mash potato mountain out of.
3. 7000 degrees of Kevin Bacon
So and so is an X because their Uncle's cousins, roommates, best friend's grandmother was Rommel's tailor. You know what I'm saying? Just as in every King's family tree is a slave and in every Slave's tree a King, we all have someone we are related to or associated with in some way tied to something nefarious. Sure, if you are a Koch brother then that is something, heck even if you are a Koch cousin, nephew, caddie, or long lost relative that is something, but if you are of the Kocsh family of Delaware who share a Great, great, great, great, uncle with them, then things get kind of dissipated. Also, geographic, occupational, military, school ties do mean something, but not always. Not everyone who goes to Yale is Skull and Bones, not that they wouldn't want to be per se, but just that alone doesn't mean they are dirty.
4. The Creative, Compelling Narrative
Sometimes a researcher or writer creates a compelling narrative teased from some facts and by using leading questions or suggestive criticism that pokes holes in an accepted, standard narrative to where the new critical, compelling narrative is so persuasive it has to be true. This may be, and can often be, done in a genuine and sincere attempt to find the real truth. The problem is the source material they are dealing with, may be not completely true to begin with, famous people have incredibly managed, incomplete, and hagiographic stories created or reminisced about. The compelling narrative though "fills the holes" explaining inconsistencies, unbelievable strokes of good and bad luck, or even the very reason for someones rise/fall. Because the new compelling narrative, one, explains any missing details or mystery, and two, provides a hidden solution, it acts as enlightenment in the form of super gossip which is more titilating to ponder. The Beatles couldn't have just been that good.
5. The Super Silly String Theory
Everything is explained away in the theory because everything is connected to the theory. People die, governments and countries fall, civilizations die out, but the theory keeps chugging away through the centuries, millennia, because those involved never take their eye of the conspiracy ball and have it all locked down and a contingency plan for everything. This makes the theory basically a creation myth where all the complexity of the world is simplified down to where the conspiracy theory is something even Cro-Magnon Man can wrap his head around it. "Zog Man Run World". For the theory to be so simple it has to be so all encompassing and powerful to where it becomes less a conspiracy than a basic law of nature, which probably explains why it shares the attribution and power of natural calamities to supernatural actors as did early man, earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, etc just don't happen, but Zog makes it so. Not to say that man isn't getting/hasn't gotten to the point where they can't manufacture/influence/exploit the effects these to some point, its just sometimes/often/frequently Nature is doing its own thing.
6. The Psychotic Semiotic Scrabble Game
Any theory that relies on hidden or reattributed meanings, but is either incredibly crude or dizzyingly obtuse, requiring Sigmund Freud and Umberto Eco, to break down the supposed real meaning of say, a movie poster, over a week long conference, is probably not giving the intended effect the person thinks on the public. Especially when the actual movie right next to it is providing that same "hidden" message in the buff for two hours straight which the public is eagerly and enthusiastically seeking out to affirm the message. Of course, subliminal messages, redirection, propaganda, etc. exists and is operating constantly, but deeper and more powerful methods of covert meaning making probably require more finesse and sophistication then a crude scrabbling of words and images that are tied to root meanings that the public is either unaware about from the beginning or the very creation of redirections would point to their existence. I mean how many teens do you think know the word MKULTRA now because it is a constant, reliable prop in countless action and thriller films now? Why would it have to be mangled and reconstituted in other films and mediums when it is recycled each week?
7. All the Puppets are Innocent
No one just goes on a shooting spree, kills themselves or dies anymore. The very fact of them being involved in such a thing points to a conspiracy or cover up. The evidence is that the primary event happened and you have to prove that it wasn't a cover up. Lack of evidence of it not being a cover up is further proof that it was a cover up. Unless there is full video of the event and the days leading up to the event, a video confession, years of blog entries, miles of forensic, ballistic and psychological evidence then they didn't do it. And if there is all that evidence, that just proves they were mind controlled, brain washed. Not to say that there hasn't been set up patsies and Manchurian candidates to some degree, and there can't continue to be, it just can't be assumed if such an event happens that by default they are so.
