How about we don't reveal how we are going to be voting in-thread. I know that helped me as a spy last game.
Can you give specific examples from last game where this happened?
Sure:
The last mission. If I wanted to continue pretending to be resistance, I had to keep rejecting all the proposals. Well, there came a proposal which I thought probably had oberon on it. I looked at what people said and their stances, and decided that if I accepted the proposal would very likely be approved. So I approved it. It ended up that it didn't need my vote to be approved, but anyway...
Also, in earlier missions, can't think of specific examples off the top of my head, but I know there were some proposals where what I want as a spy conflicted with what I want as a spy-pretending-to-be-resistance. By looking at how people seemed to be voting I could safely do what I would do as resistance without worrying about hurting my chances as a spy.
And well, consider this scenario:
Say I'm a spy, Jimmmmm is one of my partners, but tables isn't. So, I would love it if this mission was approved. However, if I accept it I look suspicious. But if it seems that the proposal will be rejected anyway, I can safely vote reject.
Or alternatively:
Say Jimmmm and Tables are spybuddies. As resistance, they should accept, but as spies, they don't want the mission to be approved. But since it looks like the proposal will be rejected anyway, they can safely approve the mission.
If a player says how they are voting before they vote and then they vote a different way, of course it looks suspicious. But a spy will never do that - they will just decide what they are going to do, say they will do it, then do it. I don't see why it matters if they explain them self before or after they vote.
On a completely separate note: Once a mission has been approved, no posting whatsoever until TA posts the results. We did that last game and it didn't end up mattering, but it could have.