Oh who did this organization with a duty to steward .org for public interest sell it to? How can you separate that duty from the action of selling it to a third party without that duty?
It's an interesting hair to split.
The action selling it to another org without that duty is abdication of that duty and they should not have had authority to sell it.
The specific circumstances only make it worse.
Their abdicating stewardship to a group that doesn't have a duty to steward is evidence enough and saying "well they used to" is off topic and not interesting. No need for new arguments when you have none.
and talking about precious years is just off topic and unrelated to the issue at hand.