For now, I'm leaning more towards the negativity of Arandor; mafia players often do this: they vote and then leave to avoid answering questions.

Does this mean I can't even visit during the game now?

After the fourth night, I associate the clue with Plesen-a. Arandor says that this clue is too obvious – it's strange why no one mentioned this obviousness before me. Then Arandor "forgets" about this clue and votes for NNW (although on the first day, he executed Kyle based on a completely obvious clue, without any hesitation).

The clue is easy, and that's a fact. I'm judging based on past games, including Zubr's games. If we talk about easy clues, then of course, the second mafia and the Witch mafia come to mind, where towards the end, she started giving easy clues about the mafia, but the town continued to be clueless and lost the game. In the other mafia games, the clues were of medium or very high difficulty (usually, only one real clue is found throughout the entire game). I don't know why the others didn't speak out about this, although Koteiko wrote that it's too obvious. I agree with him.
As for Kyle, he had a thief, and it was clear that the clue came from him, and therefore it was real, and Kyle was guilty (there were no doubts). But the thief didn't visit Plesen, because if he had, I think he would have pointed out the clue "apple," not "apple cider." What's the point of the thief coming up with such nonsense when he could do it easier? But for the GM, it's too easy, in my opinion. That's why I doubted him.
Everything is quite logical :)

Added 9 minutes ago

Arandor hopes that Plesen-a will be executed by the paladin, although he is told that hoping for the paladin prolongs the mafia's life – it's better to hang a mafia player during the day in parallel, rather than hope.

Why hope? Is the paladin stupid, that she won't kill him? She's on the town's side, and no one can stop her. That's why she came to him at night, as I said, and killed Plesen.

Added 11 minutes ago
Slonysh, it's strange to read accusations from you about Mourinho, because you were the first to vote against him and try to execute him, and now it turns out that others are to blame for this? They vote, agitate the people, and as soon as someone votes, they immediately start suspecting and accusing, even though I did the same thing as you. Your logic: Doesn't vote – mafia, votes – mafia. Well, what's the point? And if you remember, I didn't vote in the first round of votes against Mourinho, unlike you.