Personally, I would adhere to a package naming convention if it existed. That being said, best practices take time to emerge because best practices have a lot to do with how comfortable people are with a well know concept. Has there been enough water flowing under the VIPM bridge to make it obvious what the best practices are? Probably, but it doesn't mean that everybody "has to" adhere to them to build packages. I think it'd useful to have a few "examples" of how one can name a package, just for the sake of all the occasional package builders out there. Just like design patterns, there are no "one size fits all", but a few helpful recommandations might be in order to get newbies started with a decent naming practice. After all, we've all been beginners at some point and would have liked to find a forum or wiki with a lot of helpful topics... Oh wait, it exists already!
The above-mentioned idea to have a LAVAG icon in the palettes to put all the LAVA stuff is gonna have more momentum, I think, simply because it's easy to implement and doesn't mean everyone needs to follow the rule. I wouldn't put my code under a JKI palette because well, I'm no JKI! But a LAVAG palette? Yeah, I'm a LAVA for sure... so it's as good a place to put it as any other.