Yes, but by degrees.
While I think our communication tech would benefit from reorganization, I strongly agree with @Alberto above that a top-down approach will not work.
Discussing the mappingthecommons.org website, I felt strongly that you should not build a platform for a conversation that you feel should exist, but rather look at what content already exists and use the platform to support - and eventually expand - its reach. In the case of Loomio, while our system of decision making could benefit, using such tools is often seen as an additional amount of work, and working under serious time constraints, this is enough of a barrier of entry to prevent its use. The option here is, then, for you and interested parties, like @fortyfoxes, to start using it for smaller decision making tasks and display its long term value.
In the current state of things, it seems the mailing list has become the predominant form of communication, with Trello relegated to a tool to point to other documents - images, spreadsheets, and proposals - with less and less frequency, rather than as a task management system. Perhaps earlier in the project, during our daily planning sessions filled with initialed post-its (a system also deemed inefficient), it made more sense to use a tool like Trello to organize tasks. While I don’t think communication tech directly mirrors organizational structure, it is much easier to encourage the use of specific tools when a daily, IRL infrastructure supports them. This, too, however cannot come from the top down - we have to try several forms, people have to find a planning structure they like, otherwise it will crumble when it’s no longer enforced by a few people.
My concern lies in that I am not sure exactly where our organizational planning is getting done. With the Piccianello events approaching, I can only find a few documents scattered on the drive detailing its organization. While I’m certain that it’s in brilliant hands, if this is an event to be reiterated in several locations, the record of its progress - how Piccianello came to be, as an idea and logistically - is quite unclear externally. We face a similar case with unMon in-a-box - our correspondence has sprawled across several formats, and now we face the task of compiling it into wikis. This could be inevitable, but one benefit from improving our communication channels, by degrees, could be that we no longer need to act as historians to our own work. This is a much more compelling case to me than the need to improve our signal-to-noise ratio.
That said - my initial, light suggestion would be to move away from the proprietary formats for tech we already use, perhaps prototyping the open source version of Vanilla forums @nathanairplane mentioned and start from there to plug in APIs for other formats we come to find useful. I’d be happy to start using this, and see if it catches on.