I have a bit of a problem with this. Who gets to decide what is pseudoscience, what is an ethical fringe science and what is "legitimate" science. Please do not get me wrong... I think it is safe to say that Hoagland is mostly entertainment. The problem comes when somebody decides that he should not be allowed to represent himself as presenting science (again, I do not think that he really presents science that can / should be taken too seriously.) If you want proven science, look to something peer reviewed and ignore the likes of RCH.
I have the same issues with global warming science. It seems that everybody wants the right to tell those who they deem pseudo scientists to shut up (invariably those scientists who come down on the side that they do not agree with.) Hoaglands science is one area where the victims are almost non-existent (vs. Coast putting on medical quacks.) Even if somebody actually believes that the face on Mars is located at 19.5 degrees from the sun which proves the life forms took off on an asteroid, who cares?
I hate to be the black cloud on the forum, but take away all of the Hoaglands of the world and the "ethical fringe scientists" that you refer to are still going to be laughed at, shunned and ignored. The fact is that the "old guard" that you refer to, in all areas, has a vested interest to see that their thoughts and theories remain relevant.
I see your reasoning, but the thing that Hoagland and similar don't have the restriction on, is professional reputation or accountability. They have the luxury of spouting any crap they like and not have to a)prove it and b) held to account.
Take the well trailed 'prediction' that the Earth was going to be wiped out by a fictitious planet called Nibiru; Wasn't it december 2012? Twelve months afterwards it hasn't happened, and never was going to. Such as David Wilcox and others were telling any radio show who would listen that it was going to happen. In 2012, the alarm by some was such that a website was set up by 'old guard' scientists, who surprisingly did know what it was they were talking about and systematically dissected scientifically and in laymans terms why it wasn't going to happen. Unfortunately they did it too late to stop one 15 year old girl who took her own life, so terrified was she that there was no point in carrying on; this was in spite of her family, friends, teachers telling her otherwise..
So yes, pseudo scientists or as they should be better known as, charlatan, lying, snake oil salesmen and women who are touting fear, should be held to account, not as scientists though. But as psychotically disturbed individuals.