Pretty much. A lot of the conclusions he's making seem more like projections. "If I start the hunt for the poisoner, people will assume I'm not the poisoner" logic. This is a common tactic for scum who outright will give their own false motivations to drive a narrative, but it only makes sense for a town to act this way if they are named Blarg. Otherwise, there's a good chance Dusk is the poisoner and his "conclusions" are actually just what really happened to him.
My theory on Ynnek7 is actually a bit in line with Dusks thinking, but assuming the poisoner can poison more than once. The way I see it, if no one at all was poisoned last night, then something prevented that from happeneing. And the only thing I think that could of stopped it was our JAIL action.
That either means Ynnek7 has been lying low as the poisoner, or someone (Dusk) tried to poison Ynnek7 and it failed.
if it's used on even-numbered nights like I suggested before, that removes the question of what happened N1 and N3, which narrows it to N2 (on which Blarg was poisoned) and last Night (in which no one appears to have been poisoned, in which case that would implicate Ynnek7)
cross-referencing Mazre's citation of Blarg voters and abstainers versus Dusk Soldier's citation of Zubz voters, StMeph, hobohodo and I are cleared by voting Blarg before voting Zubz. Ynnek7 and fat4all are not.
apart from Dusk Soldier, these guys left haven't posted much of anything (infinit777's posts are largely fluff), with the bottom four all townies and the top two as scum. we should have no problems voting out any one of the bottom four.