If a Liberty Mutual policy's premiums specifically take said activity into account, their actuaries must have considered that activity in the process of putting

If a Liberty Mutual policy's premiums specifically take said activity into account, their actuaries must have considered that activity in the process of putting it to paper, yes? At which point (it seems to me) calling it 'abuse' is begging the question. If (and I think this more likely) Liberty Mutual, Ms Pfeffer, or both have failed to correctly consider the implications of their contract, then this becomes a question of civil law (perhaps of reasonableness?) that's difficult to answer without access to said document and a good legal opinion. The possible implications for the homeowners insurance industry (and for the Airbnb ecosystem) might be interesting, but meaningfully (if tacitly) assigning fault is outside the practical scope of a public discussion, don't you think?