Why don't you explain it and save time? Your confused hypothesis here would seem to require I be scum, think I'm allied with Hobo, but he is actually a Russian traitor allied to ranangrande.

Problem.... there was a very easy way to test this, it involves you voting for Ranangrande and Hobo either voting for him or not. If I thought he was my ally and he didn't, then I'd know then wouldn't I? So you see FT, your gamble here as stated requires me to believe you when you can easily prove it by taking a logical action. If I'm allied but not really allied to Hobo who is allied to someone else, that 'else' has to be Ranangrande, who I am trying to lynch and to which you are claiming must be so but aren't willing to vote for. Now there's no chance of me believing you anyway but you're not helping your case by basically claiming "What you need to fix your truck is a sparkplug, which I have, but will not give you even though I am asking you for a ride in this truck." It also really isn't helping that I'm staring at my car and don't have a truck.

Explain to me, FT, and to the others,

1) how is that you "know" I am allied to Hobo?
2) how is that you know he is a traitor?
3) How is that you know this treason makes him definitely allied to Rana?
4) How is that knowing he is definitely allied to rana you are refusing to vote for Rana?

You can't answer those obviously, they are not only logically inconsistent but self-incriminating, something you've avoided in spite of your claims of assurance that 'they' (being Hobo and Rana) know exactly which of is town and which scum. Based on your proclaimed hypothesis, you are acting illogically, so it doesn't even matter to me that I know its flawed because I know you don't actually believe it.