Sure, I totally agree that you don't always have to give someone the benefit of the doubt.
In context though, it is very unclear that you weren't talking about Musk.
> Well no, if someone is a habitual liar or always wrong, then you're free to assume they are lying or wrong. The ordinary opinion of random people is not a court of law where innocence is presumed.
The GP comment you were replying to specifically mentions giving Elon the benefit of the doubt. Are you implying that you shouldn't give benefit of the doubt to a random person that you deem a habitual liar and therefore assume is always lying or wrong? Or are you implying that Elon is a habitual liar, should be assumed always lying/wrong, and not given the benefit of the doubt?
