Something you should not be doing. Her research is top notch and well known on this forum. I thought she refuted your ascertions very well. You were the one in error and were impuning her integrity. It was uncalled for and unnecessary.
You're entitled to your opinion, but the fact is that she (1) repeatedly said she'd read the text of the initiative, yet (2) falsely said that it made no provision for how the available pool of judges (for the line-drawing) was to be created, from which candidates would be selected "by lot." In fact, as I pointed out by quoting from the initiative text, there is quite a bit of detail as to how that pool is formed.
One may quibble with whether Prop 77 is **good enough**, on this score (how the pool is created) and others. But to say such things as "there is no provision for how they're to be selected," is simply an out-and-out falsehood.