It's worth noting that this has been an informal rule for over 20 years, the organisations in question are Postgres specific specialists and the developers in question have long histories with the project. I don't think it's quite the same to be honest.
the situation is not the same, but the familiar corporate pressures expected to emerge and the reasons for the rule are the same: it bears scrutiny and oversight. If an erosion of trust in a group like this is not something to worry about, what is?
The worry is that "If my livelihood, and that of those whom I work with every day, were in jeopardy, I would be tempted to use my authority for the good of my company over the good of the broader user base."
Which... I find it hard to imagine a random selection of individuals, the majority of which wouldn't be susceptible to that. Everyone has to eat, and there are always catastrophes in business eventually.
