Indeed, Eugene violated civilized norms, and was booted. What a strange coincidence that it was an unprogressive fellow that got booted.

Excuse me, but this seems like saying: "Indeed, Eugine was the person who was strategically downvoting his political opponents. But it is still a strange coincidence that he also happened to be the person who was banned for strategically downvoting his political opponents." I fail to see the strangeness here.

I guess the charitable interpretation is that the list of bannable offenses is purposefully generated to include things done by unprogressive people, and to exclude things done by progressive people (which I guess means pretty much everyone who is not a neoreactionary). For example, if it would be instead someone else mass-downvoting neoreactionaries (not just for political comments, but having once made a political comment, then for everyrything, including meetup announcements), and Eugine would be posting pictures of kittens, then the moderators of LessWrong would decide that mass-downvoting is perfectly acceptable, however pictures of kittens deserve a life-time ban.

Is this what you are suggesting?