Well sure but I'm not using such frustration to shut down conversation or label offenders with politically or socially charged language intended to attack their

Well sure but I'm not using such frustration to shut down conversation or label offenders with politically or socially charged language intended to attack their character (I didn't call everyone a fascist, for example). My point would be the same if I replaced frustration with "it's intellectually dishonest" (the root of my frustration). Although I don't prefer them, I don't think it's possible to ignore all anecdotal points in a discussion. And it's also possible to present and explore an anecdote that runs contrary to your logical stance.