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.
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.
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.
