1. Does spreading mean speed read or to throw out many arguments?
Depends on who you're talking to. The term I hear most in my circles is "speed and spread," which delineates between pure speed-talking and the act of spreading (putting many arguments on the flow). I would earnestly advise you to not speed as much as possible in LD. Judges tend to dislike speed talkers (except for alumni, who for the most part can handle or even like speed). Spreading is perfectly ok though, as long as you do it ethically. Putting many high-quality arguments on the flow is good, as long as the judge can actually understand them and write them down. When in doubt, though, put quality of arguments over quantity of arguments.
2. What does an LD brief look like? What I have now is a few pages of anecdotes and stories that support equity over freedom or vice versa. Should I be gathering blocked quotes as I find them?
Again, depends on the locality. I personally have taken my traditions from my TP days and translated them to LD, with having full citations and such. Of course, my LD briefs are much shorter than TP briefs (usually around 2-3 pages), so I don't have a Table of Contents. Keep in mind you are already under severe time constraints in LD, so keeping evidence short is key.
3. When making historical or current event examples, do I need quotes to back them up? In CCA TP, if you say Iran has elections people question the truth of that.
No. But evidence and quotes certainly boosts your credibility. Of course, you don't need evidence for "self-evident" things, like Obama is the 44th President or the Rwanda genocide happened. What you should have proof for is when you extrapolate applications to support your side.
4. With abusive rebuttals is this referring to emotional bashing or new argumentation? Is it possible to spike that?
Both, although most times it's referring to new arguments. You should absolutely, 100% spike any argument you think your opponent may try to present a new argument on. "Judge, my opponent may come up in his final speech and try to respond to this point, but since he neglected to respond to it in his prior speech, it is a dropped argument, and he is not able to present new arguments in his final speech, since I am unable to respond to them." Or, if it's not the issue of a drop: "Judge, my opponent is most likely going to come up in his next speech and say _____, but when he says that, remember _____..."
5. My personal style is to try to use logos over pathos. Even in TP, I find pathos heavy teams to be compensating for a lack of research with emotion heavy arguments. In LD, are appeals to pathos expected?
LD is more pathos oriented, yes. But don't let that discourage you.
6. Are you allowed to ask for the affirmative case? Is it beneficial to do so?
There's no rule stating you cannot do so last time I checked, but it's generally considered bad form to do so. In TP it's standard to ask for the 1AC, but in LD it's frowned upon, because it looks like you need a physical copy of their case as a crutch because you may not have been able to flow it correctly or hear everything the first time.
7. Generally, how should prep time be allocated before speeches? Should it be saved for rebuttal prep?
You have only 3 minutes of prep. Try to have as much of what you're going to say in the next speech already written on your flow during your opponent's speaking time. But if you must use prep, generally Neg just splits their prep time evenly between the two speeches, and AFF varies, since he has three speeches. I would suggest at least using some prep time in between speeches (don't go for no prep time), and use just as much as you need. If you NEED to use 2 minutes of prep before your first NEG speech or your second AFF speech, don't feel bad about it.