Glossary.

Argument #

A claim supported by reasoning that connects to a consequence. Every debate argument has three parts: claim (what you assert), warrant (why it's true), and impact (why it matters).

Burden of proof #

What each side must demonstrate to win the round. Usually borne by the affirmative or proposition team, who proposes change.

Claim #

The assertion you are defending. The position your argument takes. A claim alone is an opinion until you add a warrant.

"Corporate political donations corrupt democracy" is a claim.

Framework #

The lens through which the judge should evaluate the round. Most explicit in LD (value + criterion), but every format has one (Util in policy, comparative welfare in WSDC, etc.).

Impact #

The consequence of the claim being true. What the listener should care about. Without an impact, even a warranted claim is a fact nobody votes on.

"90 percent of the country has no real political voice" is the impact downstream of the claim and warrant.

Link #

The connection between an action and its consequence in an argument. Distinct from the warrant: the link is the causal chain, the warrant is why that chain holds.

Magnitude #

How big the harm or benefit is. Measured in lives, dollars, or rights affected. One of the four weighing axes.

Mitigation #

"Yes, but less." A rebuttal that concedes the opposing argument is real but contests its magnitude or probability.

Pre-empt (preempt) #

Addressing an obvious opposing argument before they make it. "Opp will say bodily autonomy. We agree it's a value. Here's why it's outweighed in this case."

Probability #

How likely an impact is to materialize. A certain small harm often outweighs a speculative large one. One of the four weighing axes.

Rebuttal #

Any move that attacks an opposing argument. The five types, in order of strength: impact attack, mitigation, warrant attack, link attack, turn.

Reversibility #

Whether the harm can be undone. An irreversible harm outweighs a reversible one of equal size. Extinction outweighs recession.

Signposting #

Verbal cues that tell the judge which argument you are on. Without signposting, the judge cannot track your speech on the flow.

"Moving to their second contention. Three problems with the warrant."

Timeframe #

How soon the impact lands. Near-term harms outweigh long-term harms when both sides have winnable paths and equal magnitude.

Turn #

The strongest rebuttal type: proving an opposing argument actually helps your side. A turn does not just neutralize the argument; it converts it into offense.

"They argued higher prices reduce consumption, which reduces emissions. Reducing emissions is what our framework wants. Their first contention is a reason to vote for us."

Warrant #

The reasoning that makes a claim true. The mechanism, evidence, or logic that bridges the claim to reality. Without a warrant, a claim is bare assertion.

"Elected officials demonstrably vote with donor interests over voter interests (Page and Gilens 2014)" warrants the claim about donor corruption.

Weighing #

Comparing competing impacts on four axes: magnitude, probability, timeframe, reversibility. How judges decide rounds when both sides have offense on the flow.

Ballot #

The official vote sheet a judge submits. Names the winning team and assigns speaker points to each debater.

Bid #

A qualification for the Tournament of Champions (TOC) or similar national circuit championship. Earned by clearing the elimination rounds at a designated bid tournament.

Drop (dropped argument) #

An argument that goes unanswered. Most judges treat dropped arguments as conceded. "You dropped their second contention" is one of the worst things a judge can write.

Extend #

To carry an argument forward into the next speech, usually by adding new analysis or weighing. Extending without new substance is "thin" extension.

Flow #

The judge's real-time written record of the round, organized by argument and column (left side / right side, or contention by contention). Used to write the ballot.

RFD (Reason for Decision)RFD #

The judge's written or spoken justification for the ballot. Explains which arguments they bought, which they didn't, and why one side won.

Speaker points (speaks)speaks #

Per-speaker scores on the ballot, typically 25-30 in most formats. Used to break ties and rank speakers across the tournament.

Tab (tabulation) #

The room or software that processes ballots and assigns pairings for the next round. "Tab" also refers to the tournament staff running it.

Adjudicator #

The judge of a parliamentary debate round. Term used in international (BP/Worlds/Asian) and APDA circuits.

Counter-prop (counter-case) #

An offensive opp strategy where opp proposes an alternative actor or mechanism instead of pure negation. Opp now has a case to defend on the flow.

LOC (Leader of Opposition Constructive)LOC #

The second speech of an APDA round. 8 minutes. The LO tears down gov's case and builds offensive opp case (counter-narrative, counter-prop, or critique).

LOR (Leader of Opposition Rebuttal)LOR #

The fifth speech of an APDA round. 4 minutes. No new arguments. Opp collapses to a strongest-voter and writes the opp ballot.

MGC (Member of Government Constructive)MGC #

The third speech of an APDA round. 8 minutes. Extends PM's case, responds to LOC, sets up the rebuttals.

MOC (Member of Opposition Constructive)MOC #

The fourth speech of an APDA round. 8 minutes. Last opp constructive. Often the strongest attack speech on the flow.

PMC (Prime Minister Constructive)PMC #

The first speech of an APDA round. 7 minutes. The PM defines the motion, builds the case, and pre-empts the strongest opp move.

PMR (Prime Minister Rebuttal)PMR #

The last speech of an APDA round. 5 minutes. No new arguments except direct responses to MOC and LOR. The PM collapses to a voter, dismantles the LOR, and writes the gov ballot.

POI (Point of Information)POI #

15-second interruption offered to the current speaker during the protected middle of their speech (minutes 1 through second-to-last in most parli formats). Speaker may accept or refuse.

POO (Point of Order)POO #

A challenge during the rebuttal that a speaker has introduced a new argument that should be struck. Adjudicator rules on the spot.

Squirrel #

An unreasonably narrow definition of the motion that gives Opp no ground to attack. Adjudicators on most circuits rule against squirrels on principle.

Motion: "TH would tax wealth." Squirrel: "We tax wealth above $5 billion held by individuals named John, in the city of Boise, on March 14th."

Tight case #

A narrow but defensible interpretation of the motion. Gives gov a winnable case while leaving opp legitimate ground. Distinguished from a squirrel by the reasonableness of the framing.

Closing Government (CG)CG #

The Member of Government and Government Whip in BP/Worlds. They extend OG's case with new material and close the gov side.

Closing Opposition (CO)CO #

The Member of Opposition and Opposition Whip in BP/Worlds.

Extension #

New substantive material the closing team adds that the opening team did not run. Required for closing to outrank opening on the bench.

Knife (knifing) #

When a closing team's extension implicitly contradicts the opening team on the same bench. Hurts both teams in adjudication.

Opening Government (OG)OG #

The first two speakers on the government side in BP/Worlds. PM and Deputy PM. They define the motion and build the initial gov case.

Opening Opposition (OO)OO #

The first two speakers on opp side in BP/Worlds. LO and Deputy LO.

Whip speech #

The 3rd speaker's speech in Asian Parli, BP, and Worlds. 8 minutes. No new arguments. Identifies 2-3 key issues, walks each, weighs the round.

Principle vs Practical #

A WSDC analytical frame that splits arguments into principled (rights, duties, values) and practical (outcomes, mechanisms, evidence). Strong WSDC teams build both.

Reply speech #

A 4-minute closing speech in WSDC (and similar formats) given by the 1st or 2nd speaker. No new matter; new weighing and new comparisons are allowed. Reply order is Opposition first, then Proposition.

1AC (First Affirmative Constructive)1AC #

The first speech of a Policy round. 8 minutes. The Aff reads the plan plus inherency, harms, solvency, and one or more advantages. Usually fully pre-written.

1NC (First Negative Constructive)1NC #

Second speech of a Policy round. 8 minutes. The Neg reads off-case positions (DAs, CPs, Ks, T) and case attacks.

Counterplan (CP)CP #

A non-resolutional alternative that solves the case better than the plan or avoids the disadvantage. Must be competitive: mutually exclusive with the plan or generating a net benefit.

Disadvantage (DA)DA #

An argument that the plan causes a bad outcome. Four parts: uniqueness, link, internal link, impact.

Evidence card (card) #

A piece of evidence read in a Policy speech. Tagged with a claim, cited with author and year, and read with underlined/highlighted warrant text.

Inherency #

The status-quo barriers that prevent the plan from happening already. A stock issue: if inherency fails, the plan is non-resolutional.

Kritik (K)K #

A philosophical critique of the plan's underlying assumptions or epistemology. Three parts: link, impact, alternative. Common Ks: capitalism, security, biopower, settler colonialism.

Plan #

The specific policy action the Aff defends under the resolution. Read in the 1AC. The plan text is what Aff has to solve through.

Solvency #

The argument that the plan actually solves the harm it identifies. A stock issue: if the plan does not solve, the case fails on its own terms.

Spread (spreading) #

Rapid delivery (350-450 WPM) of tagged evidence cards. Used to fit more arguments into each speech. Accepted on the national circuit; rejected by most lay judges.

Tag at 150 WPM, card body at 300, underlined warrant at 220, summary back to 150.

Tag #

The one-line claim that introduces an evidence card. Read at conversational pace; it is what the judge writes on the flow.

Topicality (T)T #

A procedural argument that the Aff plan does not fall under the resolution. Structure: interpretation, violation, standards, voters. Argued as an a-priori voter.

Criterion (standard) #

The standard for measuring whether something achieves the LD value. Common pairings: Justice/Veil of Ignorance, Morality/Categorical Imperative, Wellbeing/Utilitarianism.

Value (value premise) #

The abstract concept the LD round is about. Standard values: Justice, Morality, Liberty, Equality, Wellbeing, Human Dignity. The lens through which the judge evaluates impacts.

Crossfire #

3-minute shared-time exchange in PF where both speakers can ask and answer questions. Comes after each constructive plus a grand crossfire before the final focus.

Final focus #

The last speech in a PF round. 2 minutes. Crystallizes the round into one or two voters and writes the judge's ballot.

Summary speech (PF) #

3-minute speech in PF after both rebuttals. Collapses the round into 2-3 voting issues. Plants the weighing that final focus will deepen.

Condo (conditionality) #

A theory argument that the Neg should not be allowed to run multiple conditional counterplans/Ks. "Condo bad" is one of the most-run theory shells in Policy.

Theory #

Procedural arguments about how the round should be debated. Topicality, condo (conditionality), reciprocity, abuse arguments. Argued as a voter.