Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, I'm sticking up for the idea that people's anecdotal experiences are valid, within their epistemological/cognitive limits, and not simply "false". That doesn't depend on whether or not someone got banned. That user unfortunately resorted to some behaviors that looked like antagonizing another user at the personal level. His interpretations of some of his experiences are off the mark. E.g. how some coworker hired…
You want to argue that the guy espousing sexism through his anecdotal experiences has valid anecdotes?
I reiterate that I'm using a standard for "valid" that is befitting of anecdotes, which is confined to the facts. It doesn't cover the cherry-picking of observations that are selected as the basis for anecdotes, or the means of drawing conclusions, or the appropriateness or relevance of the anecdotes to the discourse and the like.