No, calling other Wikipedia users "morons" will get you in trouble, especially if you try to excuse yourself with the explanation that you thought the other user "really was a moron". The two users were not treated the same. There was no question that Xed had a problem. But carefully reading the edits revealed the problems that Slrubenstein was having also. It is just a case of going through the edits one by one and watching what happened step by step.
Fred, while the catalyst for the e-mail might have been a specific case, I carefully did not state which one, as I was asking whether the policy in general was a good thing, rather than looking for a defence for any specific decisions. I think this may be the symptom of a larger problem; there is a concern among some editors about bringing obvious ArbCom candidates to ArbCom, for fear that their own edit history will be put under the microscope, meticulously examined for any whiff of policy violation. If one has been making thousands of Wikipedia edits over months or years, it is almost inevitable that some edits or statements will seem questionable, and there is a belief that ArbCom will feel the need to sanction both sides to give the appearance of even-handedness. I'm not saying this is actually the case, but the belief is certainly out there, and the idea that "it's just not worth getting rid of troublemakers" has been expressed more than once.
Jay.