No, but then I'm a scientist so I wouldn't believe such an impulsive conclusion without more in-depth data. I've got to know a couple of people quite well and I'm pretty sure they've got enough Aspie traits to be diagnosed, but one of them doesn't believe it, and both of them seem to be doing OK without the need for the label. Part of my problem with recognising Aspies is that I'm getting more and more evidence that I've somehow flitered NTs out of my life, so practically everybody I've ever been interested in has been unusual.......so I have very poor control data. Also I tend to stick to people closer to my own age, so the youngest suspect Aspie I know is already in her late 30s, and maturity is said to cloud the diagnosis with coping strategies.
Even with my own family, the jury's out, apart from for Dad - I'd stake my reputation on him being AS. My sister has some kind of social strangeness, but I'm miles away from knowing if she's got AS or not.
I think for me there's 2 ways - a "proper" DX, which still won't really be a definitive answer, and the "no label" approach where I just note the traits I see and leave it at that. Viewing people as AS-or-not-AS is useful to me in the same way as viewing them as Scorpio-or-not-Scorpio.......whether the concepts of AS and Scorpio represent anything real or not, they give you a way of exploring people's personalities, which is handy if you don't know where to start. Though the "AS-or-not-AS" way may lead you to a point where you might be able to understand their behaviour without asking, and even guess the remaining and unseen aspects of their personality, if AS is real - and the results should be the very stuff of good friendship, as long as you don't get cocky and think they've got the whole shebang when they haven't. Equally, if Scorpio is real, you could use that, but my money's on AS for reality.....isn't there some statistical analysis that can demonstrate the reality of a psychological concept?