In my opinion, a lot of questions being closed at the moment are quite controvesial (http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/3029/was-the-2003-invasion-of-iraq-due-to-oil-security) and I think this is largely due to the fact that guidelines of what should and shouldn't be on here are quite subjective but the moderators seem to have a god-like ability to close whatever they wish and there is only discussion after the fact.
I don't think this is constructive because most of the time, the discussions shifts to not about the actual question, but about why the question should or should not be closed.
I think the great thing about a SE site is that it's a community built by the community. There are initial guidelines, but each site has it's own "culture" if you will and what's okay and not okay was not set in stone from day one and has been allowed to shift to cater for what the community wants.
The problem with Skeptics is that it's not being allowed to do that. Moderators are dictating what can and cannot be asked on with this whole ideal of "improving quality".
And I can understand that they have the best intentions in mind, and I can understand that some questions being asked probably are not appropriate or structured correctly, but I think the community needs to be given more input on what is a good or bad question.
At the start, it was necessary for moderators to close the questions because there weren't enough users that could vote to close. But there are now over 41 users at last count that can vote to close, which means there's probably always a couple online at all times. This number is growing.
I think we should implement the 5 votes to close rule like on other SE sites, or at the very least, make it that in order for a moderator to veto-close a question, there must already be 2 or more votes supporting a close.
After all, if a question is inappropriate for the site, then it should be seem that way by more than just one person right?
I think this ensures transparency and increases communication about why a question was closed. It leads to the decision being less controversial as there is more consensus. But most importantly, it allows the community itself to have some input about what is and isn't acceptable.