No, Natalie, G2G doesn't have groups per se, but that's why the home pages for most projects (except for the ones which tell people to use Google Groups) tell people to tag any G2G posts that they make with the relevant tag. Thus, up until the Canadian History Project got assimilated by the Borg, I used to follow the canada, canadian_history, and british_columbia tags, and I still follow the sources, resources, unsourced, and sourcerers tags. (Why so many tags for each project? Because not everybody remembers to tag their posts with the relevant project tag, and newbies, of course, may not even know about tags or projects at all.)
I do agree that the limit on tags we can follow is absurdly low. If you've managed to trace back your family tree for five generations, you'd have up to 32 surnames to track, and that's already well over the limit, even before you start adding in tags for projects, placenames, or any other interests. But, in my opinion, the solution to that problem is to ask Chris to raise the limit on tags we can follow, not remove the accumulated knowledge of a project from WikiTree.
On the live communication issue, I have less sympathy. We are, after all, chasing dead people, and they're not going anywhere, so it's not like anything in genealogy is so urgent that it can't wait until somebody gets back from supper or whatever.