The thing is Eevee, I see what you're driving for, but I think you're not understanding the value of the lost information. You simply cannot "recreate" or "psydocreate" the same feelings of scummy vs not-scummy behavior without real votes and stances and arguments that lead somewhere. "I would vote X" is such an easy thing to fake.
Further, while your premise that "in a vacuum, IC's would have a 50% chance"is accurate, we are not in a vacuum. And I think that what your suggestion boils down to is "Let's have the two sides debate, and the IC's pick the winner". It doesn't account for the fact that you're essentially turning the game into a straight oratorical contest, rather than what's scummy and what's not.
Robz is probably a better orator than I am. He likes to claim he's better than Insomniac (See: M-III, following M-II
). If he's scum, he can probably "out-debate" me - and there's not a lot I can do about it.
Further to that point, what if he's town as well? Do the IC's open the next day saying "Well Galz wasn't scum, so Robz must be" - or do they put it up to another debate?
I think that while, on the surface it might be 50/50, you're actually changing the nature of the game to take away information analysis, and in it's place those who are stronger orators will prevail - for whichever alignment they are on.