Others have addressed your points, and so I hesitate to enter this discussion. However, we belong to the same Church, and so maybe reiterating a few things will help.
1. The Oriental Orthodox Churches generally don't allow intercommunion with the Eastern Orthodox. Since the "findings" of the joint dialogue between our Churches are more accepted by people in our Church, you will find more who are willing to receive Eastern Orthodox to communion, provided that their own Church would allow it. Since the EO by and large would not allow such intercommunion, even if they did receive those "findings" for the most part, it shouldn't be done, and I've never seen it done. This is not mean: this is just how our Church(es) works. This much is not an opinion.
Now, would I object to EO receiving the Eucharist in Orthodox churches? No. Would I object to receiving in their churches? No, provided they would allow it. Do I find it offencive if I'm not allowed to commune in their Churches? No, I only get offended if something else is going on at the same time. This is not unfair, it's just the Orthodox way, the way we have both inherited. These are my personal opinions on the matter: in general, I prefer to follow the usual discipline of our respective Churches because it's a lot easier canonically speaking.
2. It is important for our Churches to work toward reconciliation. However, after 1500 years of separation, I think it is silly to expect that this is going to happen in our lifetimes (read: warp speed, in church time). I've told EO friends who think it will happen in 25 years as much. At the very least, human sinfulness will keep it from happening. I'd like for it to happen soon, but I know it probably won't. That doesn't bother me: Christ is leading His Church, and if he leads Her to unite with the Eastern Orthodox, He'll see to it. Until then, it shouldn't surprise us to meet not only those who are in favour of reunion, but those opposed, both EO and OO. God willing, by the witness of our lives and the Orthodox faith we confess, we may hope to win these over. God's in charge.
Now, regarding the case above of the Greeks who required the conversion of Copts/Ethiopians to EOxy in order to commune. While I have no problem with EO requiring people to join their Church before being allowed to commune, I take exception to the rite provided in the Euchologion (at least the Slavonic one, as translated by Saint Tikhon's Seminary) by which this is done. It requires us to reject something which we didn't/don't teach, and thus is inaccurate. If it is only a matter of rejecting Monophysitism like one would reject Arianism (for example), without necessarily implying one formerly believed that, that's one thing: bishops are required to do as much. The text of the rite makes it very clear, however, that the person is rejecting Monophysitism as something which was/is taught by his former church, and I would, in all honesty, have a hard time swearing that before God, knowing that such is not the case by my years of study and real, lived experience in OOxy. The renunciations for other Christian denominations are, to the best of my understanding, accurate in their depiction of the beliefs of the other group, but not with regard to OO. Perhaps that is not the only rite by which they can be received, but it's the only one I've seen, and it is inaccurate.
Edit: Anastasios may be right that the majority of EO are not in favour of reunion with the OO, I'm not sure. I don't know how many actually care, and I think there is a big difference there.