My approach would have been to go with the new idea and see what discussion can come out of it. If they don't have time to get into it, that's one thing but if they are simply not open-minded to new ideas, I don't want to work there.
In another profession like say a specialized electrical engineer, there may be only a few positions posted a month and a handful of qualified people so both the engineer and the company would be desperate that they could together be a fit.
This story was about an anecdotal experience where the power dynamic was fairly equal
Certainly when I got my first job I felt like I was there to take a job, not seeing if the company was a good fit.
But as someone with experience, looking for higher-level positions, ideally with some time on your hands / savings in the bank to take your time interviewing around? Yeah, it should totally be a two-way street.
"Experienced software developer" is a comically in-demand job title. It's good to know that fact, and to be proportionately selective.
In that case bad luck but if they send a dick to interview you it is more likely that the rest of them are also gonna be dicks. I like companies where you actually interview with some of the people you will be working with at least as the last interview round.
In terms of your idea that a single interviewer should turn you off from working for a company, possibly. Companies can be pretty big. I am skeptical that there are many medium or large companies that can prevent all negative interviewing experiences. Especially if the negative experience is, "I saw my interviewer make a facial expression that I over-analyzed and made a huge narrative about."
That said, if you want to use that as a signal that's your prerogative. My guess is that you'd mostly get false negatives from this signal but if you have many options for employment that's hardly a major problem.
Companies can be large and in that case it's likely you will be encountering a fair number of people you won't like while there anyway. The question is whether you interview with "random interviewer of the day" (still bad if that's a bad apple but if the company is large you might take your chances while if the company is small, it's likely this is 'their best' or you will work closely with this person) or if you're actually interviewing with the team members you'll work with. If the company is large but you know you are interviewing with the team members you'll be working with and the feeling just isn't there or worse, then I think I'd take the possible false positive if I wasn't in a bind for a job.
At my current place for example I interviewed with a bunch of people in various rounds, from the typical HR stuff at the front, through various layers from CTO, my boss, our architect and then a sample of people from my immediate team. All of them very pleasant, had the best interview experience ever with the architect. We had a great discussion of pros and cons of various choices I made for the code I had to write, alternative approaches etc. Really awesome. Felt basically like a regular working session, no leetcode quizzing BS.
Previously I have interviewed with other companies where it just became clear after some time that the company and I were on very different terms with regards to how we think software development should work. A different interviewer might have been able to 'hide' some of it and I might have joined that company and been miserable.