Out if the top of my head:
Whem we moved the time table of the unsealing and were asked if there were any objections to the plan.
[I could raise similar points about any of the other times you suggest, but I'm going to focus on this one as a representative sample of the problem]
I have to wonder how well that would have gone over. The vote in question was:
Unless Kakara objects, and convincingly, the Conspiracy is locked in; in thirty-five days, you distract Dandeer, whisk away Jaron, the Seal comes down, and you then confront Berra with what you know. Does Kakara oppose the accelerated Unsealing plan?
[ ][PLAN] No.
[ ][PLAN] Yes.
-[ ][PLAN] You object to the planned sequence of events -- depicted above -- and instead suggest [write in your preferred sequence of events here].
--[ ][PLAN] Write in how you will convince them to change the plan.
-[ ][PLAN] You object to the timing - depicted above -- and instead suggest [write in your preferred time frame].
--[ ][PLAN] Write in how in Earth's name you intent to succeed in this objection.
So basically, the "plan" was a specific sequence of events, which all went off without a hitch and was a
good sequence of events. The problem wasn't that the plan as such was bad, it was that there were no detailsabout how we'd confront Dandeer
after wedistracted Dandeer, whisked away Jaron, took down the Seal, and confronted Berra.
Given that left to their own devices the NPCs took effectively
no precautions, not even the most basic one of "speedblitz Dandeer and knock her out before she has time to trigger any spells..."
We would have needed, at that time, to
in detail specify exactly what precautions we intended the royals to take in order to be confident those precautions would be carried out. We would have needed a detailed plan of action.
And we would have needed to suggest this plan, not in answer to a vote along the lines of "what precautions do you take" but "Yes, we object to the (actually good) planned sequence of events and suggest the SAME sequence of events, just with more detail of how we confront Dandeer." It was not, to put it mildly, generally understood among the players that this was a realistic or appropriate way to react to this vote choice.
...
If we'd tried to do this then, I suspect we'd have seen exactly the same situation as now- a complicated write-in plan vote that tried to cover all the possibilities, and succeeded mainly in irritating Poptart. Because there would be no easy way for us to even describe the precautions we wanted to take, without breaking the stated goal of keeping us restricted to simple vote choices and "no complicated plans." Dandeer's a smart and competent enemy, who has powers that cannot be countered directly just by "punch real good." Given that the NPCs weren't going to take on the burden of planning a suitably intelligent and resourceful counter-strategy themselves... We were
always going to need a complicated plan to fight her at some point, and that plan was
always going to be long enough to cause people's eyes to glaze over.
...
It's not that any of us oppose, or opposed, taking basic precautions against the mind control. It's just that if the idea behind vote choices is above all to
keep them simple, then the kind of "to heck with simplicity, here is a laundry list of precautions to take,
take them" thinking just doesn't fit very well at all.
If we as players, are going to be constantly vigilant ad forethoughtful, taking advantage of our creativity to come up with the things our enemies might do and
being ready for them, then we need numerous opportunities to do so, not just occasional "speak now or forever hold your peace" votes that are semi-related to the actual task of fighting the boss.