How do you separate feedback that means "rebuild it" from feedback that's just one person's opinion?

We got some pointed feedback on our site a while back — vague messaging, screenshots that looked like mockups, trial terms nobody could actually find. It was uncomfortable to read, and it also turned out to be dead right. We spent a week tearing the whole thing apart and rebuilding it instead of just patching the parts people complained about.

That decision is what I'm actually curious about. A handful of comments pushed us into a full rebuild rather than a few tweaks. In hindsight it was the right call, but at the time it wasn't obvious — it easily could've been one loud opinion instead of a real signal.

For other makers here: how do you tell the difference? Do you wait for a pattern across multiple people before you act, or does one sufficiently specific critique carry enough weight on its own? Curious whether people use any actual method for this or if it's mostly instinct built up over time.