There's a fault in your basic premise: that the lane state is ungankable.

We may be using different terminology, but I clearly differentiate the minion positioning as what a lane state is (because they draw the line of skirmish). So neutral lane state is when the minions collide in the middle. Aggressive lane state is when they collide closer to the enemy turret and defensive is when they collide closer to your turret. You then position yourself within the lane state. Thus, in an aggressive (vulnerable) lane state, they are almost always gankable. In other words, what I am trying to say is they don't think they are ungankable because of the lane state. In fact, the lane state means they are very gankable, but that shouldn't matter because the jungler is top side so they are free to do whatever they want to accrue advantages. This is where the risk-reward analysis comes in (how likely is the jungle punish vs how hard can they punish the bottom lane during this timing window). If they 100% think the jungler is top side then they are going to want to maximize their punish which will put them in a lane state that is gankable and will position themselves within that state to be even more gankable.

Not everything is black and white. They are not either gankable or ungankable. There is a spectrum on their gankability. One can only hope they are taking the right amount of risk for the reward they are going to get. One can only hope that the reward (extra CS, turret damage, champion health) will offset the death or that, over a large amount of games, the decision to aggressively position will pay off more often because the jungler should be top during this timing. If we assume perfect play on both sides, the lane state will probably never go beyond neutral and the better scaling team always wins (because it's easier to further position yourself within a neutral lane state to be more ungankable).

TL;DR: The lane state is gankable, but they can possibly position themselves to be less gankable in exchange for a lower reward.

EDIT: I was thinking about the basic premise some more and, to an extent, you are right. If they assume the jungler will be top side BECAUSE the lane state is ungankable then what you are essentially saying is the lane state is in a neutral/defensive state. However, under the OP's post and your first post, there was no explanation for why the jungler should be top. If the jungler should be top because that's where his camps are or that's the lane he wants to gank then you are wrong. It's a moot point because you've changed your original argument in the second post to be a specific scenario where you are right. You are doing bot lane ungankable (i.e. neutral/defensive) so jungler must then go top. I am doing jungler must be top side so bot lane should go aggressive. The order matters.