Maybe Github should have an informal policy that punishes bad actors by penalizing how they're listed in Atom's built-in package browser. Or create a convention of documentation that is machine-readable and easy to preview in the editor's package-updater tool. But making blanket rules regarding commercialization would likely have unwanted unintended effects.

FWIW, Atom's community manager wrote a long comment in one of the Kite plugins' Github issues:

https://github.com/atom-minimap/minimap/issues/588#issuecomm...

> As a steward of the Atom editor and the Atom package ecosystem, I'm of course concerned about packages being used for nefarious purposes. But I'm also loathe to impose blanket rules on what is or isn't valid functionality for packages without some very well-thought-out rationalization and justification for those rules. I've been watching this topic hoping that the smart people here would give me some ideas

> [an analogy to the value of advertising in other contexts]

> ...I'm definitely keeping my eye on this kind of thing and if advertisements become a problem, I'm sure that the Atom team will consider specific rules. I just don't think we're there yet.