I've often felt that maybe the front bus should skip a few stops, but unfortunately, the fuller a bus is, the bigger the chance that someone has to get out at every stop, and that means people are going to get in at every stop too.
Maybe the empty rear bus should overtake the front bus, but that's not always possible.
Teleporting to a random stop would be really annoying for people who had to get out at the next stop. That's only an acceptable solution when the bus is completely empty.
When I was growing up in Calgary when buses bunched the lead bus would linger at a stop specifically so the other buses could pass and even out the ridership.
The transit system even employed this on purpose at busy times since Calgary is such a suburban city. It's fairly rare in the morning for people to need to get off until a major intersection or light rail station. Buses were sent in pairs (sometimes three) to run the same route, leapfrogging each other at every stop. If someone did ask for a stop the driver would radio ahead and the lead bus would skip the stop. Taking the bus route at a leapfrog time really did cut the journey time down significantly. The technique doesn't work quite as well coming home since you can't predict when people will need to get off.
This happens with the subway in NYC all of the time - a very crowded train will announce that it's running express to X stop...a thousand people get off and onto the next one to continue on.
It's quite annoying when it's you that has to get off and wait, again, haha, but appears to be the right move for the system
Maybe the empty rear bus should overtake the front bus, but that's not always possible.
Teleporting to a random stop would be really annoying for people who had to get out at the next stop. That's only an acceptable solution when the bus is completely empty.