Your "even more" is an admission that your evidence is tainted.
To the extent that there is personal opinion - one could say. However, you overtly avoided smith's own admission - is smith "tainted"? Further there is the scope of the evidence John. there are the testimonies of his other wives, testimonies of his closest associates, the reason for the destruction of the Expositor, etc. And speaking of tainted, how tainted were the founders of rlds WHO stated smith was a polygamist (cited previously).
Really now John, Occam's razor really comes into play here. Not all the sources stating smith was a polygamist were trying to "justify" their sinful behavior, not all the evidence is completely colored as to render it unusable. Plain and simple John.
And you have a 'testimony' of a boy who's mom hated the polygamy smith started and sought to set her son as the next prophet - creating a schism on a key point - polygamy. A myth built upon the myth of mormonism John.
The composite evidence John, outweighs the evidence you've provided to date.