You also gloss over things - such as I didn't just speak about links, but about the out of touch thinking that the links are the conclusive thing.

I think you're just, again, misunderstanding the purpose of a link.

When someone posts a link, they're not asserting that the statement supported by the link is conclusive because of the link. They're just giving the reader a way of looking at the basis for their claims.

So upthread, I made a statement that inflation hasn't been this high since 2011. I posted a link to the information that led me to say that (in this case, the Bureau of Labor Statistics TTM calculation of the CPI). The link isn't intended to mean that it is conclusively true that inflation hasn't been this high since 2011. After all, there are other bodies that measure inflation than BLS, and other measurements of inflation than CPI, and other timeframes than TTM. The link is there so that someone can look at the backup for what I'm asserting.

The same is true of things like quotes. The link isn't there to prove that the matters asserted in the quote are conclusively true, but rather to document where the quote came from and to allow a reader (if they want) to see the larger context.

Again, none of this is useful for what you (the author behind all these characters) use the boards for. You're not trying to make easily understood discernible arguments, so there's no need for you to link to things. In fact, it would be counter-productive for you, since often you're trying to portray a character that is being deliberately coy and obfuscating what their real positions are. But for people trying to have actual discussions, links are very helpful for communicating your thoughts.