I've trained as an armorer for Glock and several other makes of firearms used in LE work.
As an armorer I've had to resolve more functioning problems caused by improper cleaning & lubrication practices by users/owners than those caused by just about anything else.
More often than not it's been the improper introduction of solvents, CLP's, oils, etc to parts of the firearms where liquids should not be present, let alone remain, during normal operation.
The introduction of liquids (or other contaminants) ... even solvents, cleaners, CLP's and oils, especially in excessive amounts which run off into places they shouldn't remain, and can't easily drain from ... can result in the accumulation of fouling, debris, grit, metal shavings and "stuff" which can interfere with the normal operation and functioning of the firearm.
While it's certainly been an occasional problem in hammer-fired pistols and DA revolvers, the openings often found in (under) the slides of many striker-fired pistols can often more easily allow the unintentional introduction of liquids into the striker/firing pin channel, as well as the striker/firing pin blocks. (Even presuming the safety plunger & spring have been properly installed, but probably worse if having been improperly installed by someone unfamiliar with the proper method.)
Too many people I watch at cleaning stations seem to think (by their actions) that they should spray and saturate guns for cleaning the same way they clean the wheels of their cars & trucks, letting amazingly excessive amounts of liquids run all over the surfaces ... and into places where they can't as easily drain from and run out of again. A little bit of solvent/CLP/cleaner can go a long way, especially when it's judiciously and properly applied to patches (and small, narrow brushes covered with a damp -
not saturated & dripping - patch).
Sure, it does depend on what gun and part thereof we're discussing, but I'm speaking in generalities based upon what I've seen as an instructor & armorer over the course of my career. I've simply seen more problems caused by over-zealous and improper cleaning & lubrication practices than I ever expected to see when I first became a firearms instructor, and later as an armorer.
The only part of a semiauto pistol I don't hesitate to liberally cover in cleaning agent,
if necessary, is the barrel (removed from the slide, of course).
Lots of folks also seem to think that if a little lubricant is good, then more is better.
While armorers can be told that the specific recommendations for lubrication practices and cleaning regimens for their folks may need to be based on the operating environments and conditions in which the firearms are going to be deployed and used, there are always some standard manufacturer recommendations for 'average' conditions and circumstances offered in armorer manuals, as well as many owner safety manuals.
Read them. Carefully consider following them. There's nothing inherently 'genetic' in
knowing how to clean and maintain a firearm, especially one used as a dedicated defensive weapon.
Also, sometimes there can be some different recommendations found among various manufacturers, so an owner/user might find him/herself using slightly different practices when cleaning, lubricating & maintaining firearms made by different companies.
For example, in Glock armorer classes the armorers are instructed to use a small amount of lubricant, some drops in various places ... while in the Sig armorer class the students are frequently reminded that Sigs are essentially "wet" guns, and the presence of lubricants should be such that it can be verified visually & by touch. Even so, it shouldn't be present in amounts that would allow it to run off under gravity or in excessive amounts.
I've always been interested, and sometimes surprised, regarding the lubrication recommendations when reading through various armorer manuals and taking the classes. What works for one manufacturer may not be something considered recommended, or at least not optimal, by another manufacturer.
Also, just having access to an armorer manual (or online instructions) may not work as well for many folks as they might wish.
I can't think of an armorer class I've yet attended (and I'm well into double digits in classes/recerts) where someone - or a few people - didn't make mistakes of one sort or another
which they didn't realize and catch themselves, but which had to be corrected by an instructor or another experienced student. And that's with the people listening and watching a demonstration of the skills in the course presentation (meaning instructor demonstration, often accompanied by video support), having an armorer manual and notes available to them, and with all the proper and necessary tools at their disposal.
Also, attending a single armorer class, while well & good, can often give a student just enough info and limited hands-on experience to let them become over-confident and able to make mistakes with more speed and alacrity.
I found it really helped to return from my first several classes and have a much more experienced armorer available to me to watch my efforts and help me. Sort of an apprenticeship, as it were. (I later felt obligated to do this for other new and lesser experienced armorers, and still do so, as I've kept my hand in as an armorer even after my retirement.)
As a Glock armorer, I'd suggest the OP consider taking their Glock to a local Glock armorer for inspection, just to make sure everything is as it should be in the gun, and perhaps ask for some suggestions when it comes to Glock maintenance, inspection, recommended scheduled replacement of the RSA, etc.
I'd also never recommend someone do a "25 cent trigger job", either.
The G23 ought to provide many years of satisfactory service if properly maintained, serviced and used with good quality .40 S&W ammunition.
Enjoy.
Just my thoughts. I'm not anybody's expert on this stuff, either.
