I think a lot of this comes down to identification style. At one end, there’s being very reserved and only suggesting an ID if there are enough features to rule out anything else, including that one rare species last seen in 1910. At the other, there’s willingness to ID assuming that nearly all the others in the area were species X, therefore this one is also species X. I think identifiers fall somewhere on this spectrum, often in different places, depending on genre, family, etc.
There’s also beginning identifier confidence (see: Tomatoes, berries, fruits, and vegetables - discuss!), where awareness of the rarer species may be lacking, leading to overconfident IDs.
In such cases where you feel like the ID is overconfident, you can ID it to a higher level (less specific) without disagreeing, but leave a comment stating what would be needed to get it to the lower level (more specific).
Alternatively, if it’s something like a Gerald (see: Happy Gerald Day), you can tag in (@) some of the other identifiers you interact with to help disagree with an unevidenced identification.