Outside of outlandishly poor designs that should have been caught even before, say, a public test server release (e.g. original Wanderer's Minuet), I can scarcely think of a change to existent content, classes, or designs therein according to feedback that didn't take a step in a new poor direction in addition to however few steps it took forward or towards a direct, non-errant solution.
If a revision causes just as many, or greater, problems with the alleged 'solution', I can't exactly exactly say their revision procedures are "on board" with the complaints those solutions claim to come from.
* Above now revised for clarity.
Shield Swipe not particular useful in raids --> fix guts its usefulness in dungeons.
DoTs don't seem particularly fitting as a source of so much Monk damage --> "fix" guts all positional and stance-timing control, each absolutely core to Monk.
PvP lends itself towards toxicity -> Feast chat muted.
X job performs poorly due to poorly designed mechanic -> Have some more potency?
Shake it Off doesn't work on most status effects, to the point it literally feels like a trap if ever depended on in one's first run of a given piece of content -> Here, have Divine Veil, but better.
Ooh, I'd love a BLU job -> Have a BLU minigame!
Only two of the bullet points you gave had anything to do with revisions. Ultimate raids are a fine example of taking on player feedback for new content, but it doesn't give any positive evidence for their ability to fix things without newly breaking them.