Second, I have a high threshhold for conditional arguments. Generally, the negative has the responsibility of disproving the affirmative. Conditional arguments seem an acceptable method. I have voted against them on rare occasions when de6aters can demonstrate that they create an unfair advantage. I have rarely found this argument persuasive.
Permutations seem to be a test.
The multiplicity of actors does not seem to be an excessive extension of fiat. I have voted for and against plan-inclusive counterplans. If there is a actual literature which supports the counterplan over the plan, then the counterplan is not Inherently abusive. But, keep in mind that I am fairly tabula rasa and none of these theoretical biases are binding. Finally, I believe that style and delivery are still important.