As the person who made that compilation of anecdotes from others (although I've long since mostly stopped collecting anecdotes, much less maintaining such a compilation), nothing about me has any bearing whatsoever on the factuality of the anecdotes within it.
Logically-fallacious diversionary tactics:
• A red herring logical fallacy is a tangential topic introduced as a distraction. One _very_ common example is trying to create an irrelevant discussion about a messenger/claimant (often by introducing alleged personal attributes or asking about unstated opinions).
• An ad hominem logical fallacy is an argument or implication that at least one supposed characteristic about a messenger or source somehow affects the validity of one or more claims presented when any such characteristic is completely irrelevant — and this is nonsensical for cases in which information originates from others. (Sometimes such characteristics potentially _can be_ relevant: for example, it may be appropriate to question a person's honesty when she makes a claim about herself or her own experiences. However, the anecdotal evidence logical fallacy may apply in that situation.)
• Misrepresentation, or presenting a distorted version of a position or argument, is another form of red herring. Attacking such a fabrication as a means to suggest refutal of the actual, original assertion constitutes a straw man logical fallacy. (A refutation with one or more vague, sweeping claims for which no proof is provided may be related. The burden of proof rests on the claimant, so offering constructive criticism is a good idea: clear and specific, with citations if applicable.)