Why Riot seemingly ignores negative feedback

I have been playing since season 1 and every season Riot seems to become less responsive to negative feedback of any kind as the game gets older. My theory is that since Riot has been growing in popularity, they have been experiencing a number of effects that have made them seem disconnected from the LoL community that isn't LCS.

One obvious issue that Riot is having is the incredibly present confirmation bias. That is the phenomenon that occurs when someone/group only searches for data that validates their hypothesis/beliefs while diminishing the value of anything that argues against them. Basically, Riot is ignoring the vast majority of any feedback that doesn't stroke their egos. The feedback they do listen to or respond to they do so in a way that makes it seem insignificant. Of course this also makes them highly subject to internal validity.

It is this confirmation bias that is making PBE players feel completely ignored by Riot. The PBE was practically screaming at Riot about Warlord's bloodlust and how broken it was with certain champs. They were telling Riot a number of issues that went completely ignored. Some Rioter even said that, "Before releasing it, we understood the possibility of Warlord's Bloodlust hyper-synergizing with a couple of champions . Now that it's been out for a bit and has proven to be abusive in some cases..." Source: http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/zUl9w5tx-upcoming-hotfix-changes-for-warlords-bloodlust

We understood the POSSIBILITY?! The moment this mastery came out on the PBE notes, the vast majority of players didn't even need to test it to know that this would be abused. This is just one example of the confirmation bias that Riot is harboring. There are tons of other examples and too few counter examples.

Now, as an engineer, I am all about solutions. I was guilty of the same issues a few times during college. I have been part of groups that thought we had a good idea, but did not seek out outside viewpoints. As a result, we became blind to some very obvious issues in whatever we were doing. One method we used to help prevent this from occurring was taking our research, project, program or whatever to other professors and having them try to find flaws in our week. What Riot needs is an unbiased outside party to critique them. The patch rundown with Xspecial is one example of what Riot needs more of. Xspecial was bringing another point of view into the discussion and did not fully agree with the other rioters. Riot needs to seek the input of more people who are familiar with the game and capable of understanding the possible effects of certain changes BEFORE they go through with changes. Seeking input afterwards is analogous to testing how hot a piece of glowing metal is by touching it then asking for medical aid after. Instead of touching the piece of metal glowing red, it would be wiser to first ask someone else if they think its hot before touching it.

Though if my theory is true, Riot will probably ignore this post.