This forum we’re currently using requires a certain reputation rank before allowing certain privileges. Why not reserve certain crate naming privileges to authors of high enough reputation?
Based on the discussion, it appears that Crates is failing to provide a means to add a reputational score to crates and crate authors. Crowdsourcing crate reputation as a means to separate the good from the bad is a proven system (tripadvisor, Amazon ratings, etc.).
Personally I’m not a fan of any statement containing the words “it cannot be done” or its equivalent. Yes it can, you just don’t want to (which can be ok, perhaps).
a) Add reputation to authors and crates, reserve specific crate naming conventions to higher reputation authors, also in a graded system (higher reputation can register more names, more freedom in naming)
b) allow user reviews and ranking of crates (helps solve discoverability problems of crates too)
c) Beef up the search systems to filter out low reputation crates (only 3 stars+).
d) Provide tooling to inspect the included crates and their reputation, and warn if low reputation crates are used anywhere in the dependencies (these are bad for security if nothing else).
e) try experimental techniques like AI to suggest relevant crates for a project or finding deviant behaviour. And try allowing for paid-for crate curation lists. The sky is the limit, try stuff and see what works.