I'm confused a little by your post.
First, it seems hat you're suggesting a certain weight might be fine for a certain time (2:32), but if you want to faster you need to be lighter, and you seem to be basing that off of the fact that you've run faster on less mileage and were lighter when you did it.
That logic doesn't make a ton of sense to me because it boils marathon times down to a simple function of height, weight and mileage. That obviously doesn't make a ton of sense. Maybe you just have a naturally bigger engine than the other poster or your training plan was better or your course was faster or your weather was better or you are mentally stronger or you just had a great day.
Then you seem to agree with that poster that running miles and making good food choices will get you to the right weight, but then say that people aren't perfect in their diets so that approach won't work. Which implies then that there should be a concerted effort to specifically lose weight. While I don't think hat perfection is required or that a pound or two makes a difference, if you do think that, shouldn't the advice simply be to be very disciplined with your food choices during your training cycle?
The simple answer is that while as a general rule, all other things being equal, lighter is usually better, all other things aren't equal. We all have different frames, genetic predispositions, etc.
There is no universally "right weight."