Most people will skim the title. Some will read the abstract. Few will read a specific paragraph or two of details. Yet, the writer doesn't know who's going to read what. Could be the writer himself, 6 months down the line. Often times those details are pure gold.
Honestly, I have seen this happen so many times that I rather suspect it is fairly common.
It works better when team has mechanism for knowledge sharing and core developers fix their own bugs.
Speaking from experience, when there's multiple people trying to take over the same bit, they only create conflicting changes all over the place and deadlock the project. It's worse than if no work was not done. Now somebody needs to take the lead and remerge things manually and discard what cannot be merged.
Regarding maintenance, the later army of maintainers is typically a bunch of contractors mostly sitting idle billing for time. The size of the maintenance team has little correlation to the workload.
My favorite feedback is when someone replies to a 1000+ word newsletter with “Wow, short and to the point! Thanks”.
This is bordering on the No True Scotsman fallacy.
In these situations it's more important to share "what is the problem" than how to solve it.