Evidence is important to me when making a decision, and I will read as much as I believe is necessary to make a good decision. I will only read the parts of cards that were actually read in the round and it is the responsibility of the debaters to clearly mark what they have read in their evidence. At a minimum, source and date should be read, quals are a plus. I'll flow cross-ex for clarification purposes. I'll listen to most theory arguments, but I do have predispositions.
Competition is often a sufficient check against abusive counterplans.
I can be sympathetic to the abusive nature of running multiple conditional counterplans. More on counterplans because I realize that they are a major negative strategy on this topic. Similarly, better solvency is often a sufficient net benefit. The full text of permutations should also be made available to the neg upon request. The legitimacy of consultation CP's is open to debate.