DD - I won't speak for fa, but I think there is a time and place for meeting regularly, or, at minimum having a way to check in regularly if folks are living communally. The frequency, degree and intensity is gonna vary, which I think is what you are getting at. The most intentionally communal living situation I ever lived in we met every other week for an hour. It was boring, but it was helpful in terms of the concept of "seen face": we were showing up together in a manner that was agreed on to be part of that group. Beyond a household, I'vbe always seen this model break down when it is overly formalized. People skip meetings, and that leads to other people deciding to skip meetings, and pretty soon almost everyone doesn't want to deal with a meeting, because meetings suck.
On the other hand, when I did Food Not Bombs (a looooooonnnnggg time ago), we had formal meetings, but we also had weekly dishwashing parties after the dinner where a lot of us had a chance to check in and talk about shit, which helped the social cohesion. It was never a formal thing, and there wasn't an invite list (there was an uninvited list, but that was mostly about the wingnuts that projects like FNB attract).
The upshot of the regular check in is that for a very small and intentional group, it maintains cohesion. It wouldn't need to be a meeting, maybe it is a dinner, with or without prayer (my vote, my prayer, would be without), or another sort of regularly occurring event where folks can intentionally share space. The downside is that obligatory meetings suck, and even when it isn't a meeting, having it be regular and obligatory sucks at least some of the joy out of the experience. Plus, the larger the social grouping, the less enforceable (sp?), and while communal living situations are nice, they don't exactly constitute a full community, as I would understand that term.
On the other hand, less formal check-ins (ala my FNB experience), tend to become increasingly exclusive. As an increasingly coherent, but unofficial, ingroup forms, it is really easy to fall in to quasi-vanguardist organizational models, which are both anti-community, and manifest from a much more intense common cause.
I honestly think the answer (and it will never be a perfect answer) lays somewhere between these, using both or one or none as is appropriate. I'd love to tell you I know the right formula, but I haven't figured it out, and even if I had, the right formula for my circumstances isn't that same as yours might be. If you want to have regular community meetings, do it. I am not coming all (or maybe even most) of the time. Also, if you want to claim community without some sort of horizontal means of communicating and airing concerns, needs, and grievances, I am not gonna be a part of that project.