Because we don't have stats on what % of home-office owners want to go back to work and there's no way of knowing whether his anecdote is just a token exception

Because we don't have stats on what % of home-office owners want to go back to work and there's no way of knowing whether his anecdote is just a token exception, or a representation of a larger outlier. Maybe 1% of home-office owners want to go back to work, maybe 49%. The comment's anecdote doesn't do anything. More importantly, the comment has nothing but an anecdote that's attempting to make a statement on what the stats will probably be. There's no fact-based discussion possible, only whether you think the anecdote is "representative" or not. Which you have to decide based on your prior beliefs, because the post doesn't contain new information ("X population has nonzero people who disagree on belief Y" is not new information). I guess I should ask: what discussion could be had around this anecdote, other than "guess the % who agree"?