I try to maintain an excessively open attitude toward definitions when learning a new language.
For instance, there was another Esperanto question that some people had trouble with -- same format as this one -- where the choice was, iirc, between "gravaj" and "importantaj". The comments were wondering why we might choose one over the other, and the answer was a seemingly esoteric mix of grammar, culture and definition. But the more I let that answer sit in my head as a background process, the more I started to feel that it wasn't actually baseless, that it made perfect sense, that I just needed to let myself get comfortable with not trying to translate it into a more "natural" way of expressing it.
When you ask "wouldn't you just say x", you're still trying to translate instead of letting the example sentence act as a more abstract learning tool. Maybe this particular example is nonsensical or useless in Esperanto, who knows, we're not at the level where we can interact with the culture enough to analyze its use cases. But in accepting that it might have use cases, we're best off, in our current state as beginners, approaching every new sentence and phrase as a chance to rethinking the boundaries of our definitions -- a chance to expand what sort of structure and words we allow into our internal framework of "what we would 'just' say".
As for specifically, I was on eo.wikipedia earlier reading about the translator for 100 Years of Solitude (my current "grail" book for Esperanto). On en.wikipedia his page consists of just one sentence and a list of works, but in Esperanto there's a few pages about his life. One of those sentences mentioned him joining some anarchist Esperanto group in his hometown, Kultura Klubo. My thought was "that sounds kind of like what I would call an anarchist infoshop", and those are based in physical location, sometimes, but not always, the ground floor of someone's home.
Is this what the question is referring to? Almost certainly not. But, you know, it could be. Or it could be something entirely different. It could be a sorority like you suggest, but wikipedia leads me to believe that there's only one uni where Esperanto is spoken widely so that's also not likely. There are many Esperanto speakers and the culture has evolved and grown for 128 years in a huge variety of contexts. When we come into it as beginners, still on the absolute first step of familiarizing ourselves with the rules and common words of the language, we have to always remember that people's experiences can vary wildly. Not only are we unable to grasp the intended meaning a lot of what we're reading, we're still a long way off from being able to distinguish between "teaching sentences" and "applied sentences".
With that in mind, I think in a lot of cases it's best to just power through the first steps -- through the duolingo course, through the audiobook of the Esperanto Teacher, through annoying your non-speaking friends by incessantly mixing Esperanto phrases into conversation -- through all those awkward aspects of this initial learning period... and into the real learning period, when we read real content and engage with real Esperantistoj and really find ourselves digging deep into the subtext of what we read/hear because we've stopped trying to interpret everything literally into comfortable terms -- forevermore just skimming gracefully over the tops of the words, phrases, clauses, sentences, dialogues, ktp.
But I'm afraid as a fellow beginner -- this ridiculous manifesto aside -- I can't answer your question. :3
Yes, sounds strange. If correct, it has to be a "domo" with a broader meaning than the physical one. A big club with several "houses".
I think they meamt "besides being club members also living in our house". It would be "Club members from our house" = "de nia domo" or "el nia domo".