True, but on the other hand bugs can go unfixed for years, with developers ignoring them or prioritizing them super ultra low. I know I've opened enough bug reports over the years that I can't go back and check on all of them, but I'm still hoping they'll get fixed some day.

If it's closed for "inactivity" while I'm actively waiting for a response from the developer, that's going to annoy me.

What exactly do you mean by "actively waiting"? Is your act of waiting actively in any way perceivable to anyone but yourself?

As opposed to having forgotten about it. As in, if the developer responded, Github would send me an email and I would jump back into the conversation. As in I can't do anything more until the developer responds, but once they do I'm ready to help.

There's a quick and easy way to tell if someone is actively waiting: respond to them.

The reports may still be relevant. If the problem is easily reproducible or even just well described, a bug report should be useful independent of the activity or further engagement of the reporter.

Why would you "check in" in the presence of e-mail notifications of new developments? Most projects also don't like it if you post "bug still exists" every few months.

Reading email notifications would count as checking in, I don't know why you assumed otherwise.

The parent explicitly mentioned that they did not get the e-mail notification they were supposed to get, suggesting they were subscribed to the issues. So if waiting for e-mail counts your criticism doesn't seem to apply.