Short answer: No. Why would we do that?
On a personal level, I see Facebook as a useful tool that makes my life appreciably better for many different unrelated reasons, but this question asks about the EA community, so I'll stick to that side of things.
As long as Facebook exists, there will be a lot of people who use it as a primary platform for making plans and hanging out with people, and those people will be less likely to stick with EA if the community mostly disappears from Facebook. (Also, if the "mainstream" groups went down, groups like Dank EA Memes might stay up; I don't have any beef with that group, but it's not the first thing I want a search for "effective altruism" to return on Facebook.)
I've seen squabbles break out on Facebook groups, but those were rarely any worse than the most awkward in-person interactions I've seen in the community; they're also public, and involve people using their real names, which helps to keep things somewhat civil. I'm more uncertain about the EV of small, private EA message groups within Facebook, but I haven't seen evidence that they are actively harmful.
I agree with Zvi that the newsfeed is poorly designed and that some of the company's business practices aren't especially ethical, but I haven't seen any evidence that using the platform has caused any kind of collective harm to the movement, or even to many individuals in the movement.
I entirely agree that "willpower alone" approaches aren't likely to work for many, or even most, people. I block my newsfeed and don't have the Facebook app on my phone. I also block dozens of other websites that I find more distracting/sticky than valuable.
I do similar things to control the amount of sourdough bread I eat; if I purchase good sourdough, I find that willpower isn't enough to stop me from eating too much of it, so I only buy it on special occasions. Like bread, Facebook is a "sometimes tool" that I'm glad to have in my life.