madchemist, please do the right thing. I urge you to take a chance on proposing a team structured around excluding the confirmed Spy team of Panzer Commader, tonkatoy5, aedan777, and Jacksonian Missionary. The worst that can happen is it is rejected, thus revealing some crucial voting behavior, and Cliges, who is also a known Resistance, makes the final proposal of the game.
Actually, aedan makes the last proposal, because of the talisman he got to start the round. So if you are indeed Resistance, my mission is the last chance for the Resistance to come out of this with a win.
I have very little to add to my previous analysis, but a quick summary is below:
I know for a fact that I am Resistance, Cliges is Resistance and Jacksonian is a spy. We as a group also know that Ironhead is a spy unless all three of Panzer, tonka, and aedan are, and that Jacksonian is a spy unless Ironhead, myself, and Cliges are all spies.
The question is, how are these things to be interpreted in the light of the sabotaged missions?
Mission 4 has the initial chain of contracts, myself, Cliges, and Jacksonian. Mission 4 also was sabotaged only once, and the spies needed to sabotage in order to not lose.
Option 1: Jacksonian was the only spy and he sabotaged. This is the simplest and most obvious explanation.
Option 2: Jacksonian is a spy along with Panzer but not with aedan (ignoring tonka's role for the moment), but somehow figured out that only one of them would sabotage.
Option 3: The entire contract chain is bad in addition to Jacksonian, and since the proposer was aedan, he was able to sabotage alone via the "proposer sabotages" rule.
I'm ruling out 2 right away. It seems too far-fetched. 1 and 3 remain possible.
Mission 5 was identical to 4, except that Jacksonian was replaced with 2kNikk/k-59/Ironhide. It was also sabotaged once. Precisely the same considerations apply: was there a lone spy on the mission sabotaging, the entire contract chain, or Panzer plus (possibly) one other? All three of these are possible, at least in theory.
Mission 6 is interesting because it failed twice. Everyone knew it would fail because it had me but did not have Cliges, but it failed twice. Jacksonian accounts for one of those, while the other is included among 2kNikk/k-59/Ironhide, Tonka, Aedan, myself, and Audren.
If it's k-59, everything is simple. It explains the mission 5 sabotage. It also points to Audren being a more likely goodie than not, I'd say.
If it's tonka, then we have Panzer/tonka/Jacksonian and one of aedan and Ironhead being spies.
If it's me, then there's the question of why a double-sabotage didn't happen earlier.
If it's Audren, then Panzer (or myself) also has to be a spy based on mission 5, which again opens up the problem of how double-sabotaging was avoided earlier.
Long story short, I can't see any reasonably probable alternative to k-59 and Jacksonian being spymates. The Panzer/tonka/aedan combination could still work, but it requires a couple lucky coincidences falling their way. It also does not match aedan's behavior in being concerned about this last team having me on it, predicated on faulty reasoning though that concern may be. Panzer being a spy without the rest of the chain requires an even more improbable set of events falling the spies way, and I will discard that possibility, which forces k-59 and Jacksonian to both be spes. Thus, I trust Panzer, and therefore trust tonka and aedan too, leaving the last spy to be Audren or CaesarCzech. And based on general behavior and his presence on mission 6, Audren remains my preference.
Proposed:
madchemist
Cliges
Audren
Panzer Commader
tonkatoy5
aedan777
APPROVE