If wolves kill Fred/000 then we don't know anything about which of those alive is a wolf and the number of potential wolves remains the same.
If wolves kill someone who is not Fred/000, the number of potential wolves drops.
It is in the interests of the wolves for Fred/000 to be eaten.
It is in the interests of the villagers not to kill Fred/000 unless we have good reason to believe they are a twin, because if we lynch someone else from the list of unknowns we are removing potential wolves. If we focus on killing wolves, less villagers get eaten and we also have a chance to kill the siblings by killing the wolf half of the pair. It is in the villagers interests to focus on killing wolves.
Dimo's suggestion that if one is eaten and the other is not the following night means the other is a wolf is false. A wolf could do this to ensure we lynch a villager while they, at the same time, eat a villager, giving two villager kills over a day/night cycle rather than having a chance of killing a wolf.
tl;dr: We should lynch Dok Howl.
If wolves kill someone who is not Fred/000, the number of potential wolves drops.
It is in the interests of the wolves for Fred/000 to be eaten.
It is in the interests of the villagers not to kill Fred/000 unless we have good reason to believe they are a twin, because if we lynch someone else from the list of unknowns we are removing potential wolves. If we focus on killing wolves, less villagers get eaten and we also have a chance to kill the siblings by killing the wolf half of the pair. It is in the villagers interests to focus on killing wolves.
Dimo's suggestion that if one is eaten and the other is not the following night means the other is a wolf is false. A wolf could do this to ensure we lynch a villager while they, at the same time, eat a villager, giving two villager kills over a day/night cycle rather than having a chance of killing a wolf.
tl;dr: We should lynch Dok Howl.