GIF should be pronounced GIF, not JIF.

Some of Pro's arguments end up going nowhere, including the consistency with the acronym's components (Con pointed out that there are a wide variety of acronyms with similar inconsistencies, and it's unclear that this causes any problems) and confusion with the brand Jif (Pro basically drops this after R1, since Con pointed out that their context in sentences makes them distinct). For Con's side, I'd say the same about how Wilhite used it. It's not really relevant to whether it should be used a certain way, nor is the relatively weak instance of confusion that may result from slurring the word "gift" something I would consider strongly. Maybe sentence structure could cause problems here, but as Pro points out, it's simple enough to clarify. Pro made an effective argument for why text to speech is the greater consideration, regardless.

It's in the rest of the points that things get more interesting, though both sides run into internal inconsistencies.

Pro starts off by arguing historical usage of the letter "g," but then argues that language is dictated by popular usage. One of those points is paramount, and Pro ends up emphasizing the latter, but having suggested the former, it's difficult to give him this point wholesale, even with what I would consider a relatively weak response from Con (saying that he's shifting the goalposts doesn't really tell me anything - Pro can argue what should occur by any means he wishes so long as he does so before the final round, and I wouldn't consider it a truism to argue that popularity should be the paramount metric).

Con doesn't do himself any favors, either, since he dances from the position that all he has to prove is that they're equally good to the position that "ʤif" is the better pronunciation. These positions aren't in direct contradiction, but Con does end up sacrificing the former for the latter, since the former drops out of the debate almost entirely after the first round. That's probably for the best, since the former doesn't provide much in the way of offense and would have required that Con beat back every argument Pro made to win. Still, it means much of Con's opening round, which focused on defeating Pro's points and presenting his sole argument that they should be treated as equally valid because dictionaries say so, end up rather weak because Con just doesn't seem to care about them by the end. Giving yourself two independent avenues to win is rarely an ineffective strategy and it could have worked here.

Still, uncertainty becomes Con's sole way to win this debate, since the only argument in his favor at this point - that we reduce confusion to use his pronunciation - is nonunique, as both sides reduce confusion. So if Pro doesn't have any benefits beyond that, then I vote Con.

But that's the thing: popularity is a benefit. I don't agree with Pro that popularity inherently imparts correctness to a term, but if it is the most common usage, then it is most effective at reducing confusion for the most people because fewer people have to change. I can see reasons for going the ʤif route, but since confusion over terms seems to be a common thread throughout this debate for both sides, since I don't see a reason why I should disregard popularity as an issue when it comes to linguistics, specifically (Con had the opportunity in both R2 and R3 to make this case), and since popularity clearly affects confusion, I end up voting Pro.

Both sides make decent arguements about Gif or any prefrence being preffered,
That there were decent arguements on both sides,
'Doesn't mean that Con made the better arguements though,
But rather that both argued well, and that depending on one's view, either prefferring Gif or 'Any could be correct.
So I score arguements a tie,
Both used sources, a tie,
Pro accepted Con's method of arguing any rather than Jif, so conduct a tie,

Jif Peanut Butter and Gift,
Both parties made points on why, either consideration wasn't vital.
Tie

The difference between initialisms and acronyms, escapes me,
Though I suppose initialisms tend to be harder to pronounce as an acronym,
It 'seems more a convienence, than a hard rule.
Both made examples of words,
Tie.

While Con has a point about society if wrong, ought be corrected
I'd say Pro has a point about society being less rigerous than science,
Though language has rules, is kind of sciency I suppose.
But, Pro himself used historical early examples of ought, for G pronounciation,
So that one get's the feel that Pro thought language 'ought follow earlier convention.
Tie

Con has a point about the founder's prefrence and intention,
And Pro about societal prefrence.
Tie

Con's point about G's Jee pronounciation,
Pro counters with societal prefrence,
Which makes sense to me, certain accents are 'correct in certain countries,
Tie