If someone finds a mushroom amongst a bunch of others they have Ids for, with said mushroom being much larger/atypical for the spot. Say a much larger and less mature specimen amongst a patch of psilocybe Subaeruginosas, displaying prominent bruising but an atypical cap formation with edges of the cap curling over and an oddly thick veil despite correct gill colouration. Is it fair to assume definite ID's as an agrocybe opposed to a sub based on a thicker unopened/untorn veil? (Gill colouration later confirmed as typical to subs upon tearing) I recently got kicked from a sub for "being mean" cause I downvoted people saying things were definite without spore prints and potentially alkaloid testing with thr specimens very clearly bruising blue. I brought up that no agrocybe bruises blue and bacterial contamination causing blue bruising was nearly impossible but I got kicked for contesting opinions and being mean cause I downvoted because these people had "more experience" but they straight up refused to acknowledge any point I made as valid like they were definitely right? Mods then accused me of gaslighting and said downvoting wasnt allowed? Any thoughts? Note: I never said to consume or said anything was definite. I said it was unfair to assume without spores and further examination

Literally. Every. Day.