This seems a bit odd... the issues happened within the context of the group's activities and the problems were shielded by EA. This is like suggesting the Catholic Church had nothing to do with child abuse and we should only blame the priests.
At least in the Bay Area, I heard that the people who regularly organize in-person events will refuse entry to certain men who have a history of preying on women, but really there is no way to prevent those men or anyone else from persisting in publicly proclaiming that they are effective altruists.
Similarly, effectivealtruism.org is just one non-profit in an ecosystem of dozens and does not own the trademark "effective altruism" or "effective altruist" (which might give it some ability to control how the trademark is used or by whom it is used).
You're overgeneralizing too far. This is like saying just because a church has a building doesn't mean they are an organization. The building was purchased with the expressed intent of being used for the group. It appears you trying to suggest there are weak ties where there are actually strong ones. These people all know each other and shared ideas.
I'm not a huge fan of EA, but I'm sick of seeing HN and EA endorse tribalism by saying that all Christians this or all Republicans this or all white people that or all rich people that....
-rich white Republican Christian