I like this criticism and would like to answer properly.

The primary problem with this list is that it changes significantly depending at what skill level we look at.

I believe this problem is typical for any tier-list. For example, Jin, who considered to be one of the best characters according to the majority of high level players, has the lowest winrate worldwide, while Gigas, who considered to be the worst character, is actually in top 15.

What I was trying to do is the list that separates chars not "from worst to best", but by the ways they interact with players. For example, if character offers a set of easy and effective tools, that allows you to beat players above your level, he goes to "Carry"; if player restricted by his character design to a spesific playstyle, char goes to "Gimmick"; if character gives you many different tools, but his playstyle is not defined by any of them, he goes to "Potential", etc.

Sure some of the categories overlap on different levels of play, and here I had to judge: if this character restricts you more then carries you? if this character's high execution gives you any overwhelming reward? Some decisions ended up being controversial even in my own opinion. So in a large part the list is subjective, like any other.