That's also what struck me as odd, but having maintained legacy systems for a long time I can see why it's sometimes preferable to use a proven if inelegant workaround than going in and try to fix the actual defect, especially if you have limited debugging options.
It actually follow a common pattern in evolution. Doing big changes are hard, difficult and risky. Tinkering and doing small changes over time works for most things and any legacy system, as long they are not directly harmful, can remain as a byproduct. There is even a word for it in biology called spandrel.
Analogies to IT and development aren’t that appropriate here tbh.
This isn’t a legacy system, if you want to keep the IT analogy this would be failing over to a different system or replacing an existing solution that doesn’t work with a competitive alternative rather than fixing all your bugs.
