Do you bother to check out Links?

Yes, I often do, and then comment on them. Some links are good and informative, others, used to back up an argument are faulty and even, sometimes the person posting the link hasn't actually understood the link and has posted a link that completely undermines the point they wish to make.

I have an academic background and if I make statement that could be contentious, I think it is right that I give the source of my information.

The links to videos in the Virtual cruise from Mainz along the river Main thread show places and things there that some of us will never visit in real life.

Links to detailed informtion about museums and history are often very interesting.

For example, here is a link to a video about the technology of early printing, including a demonstration.

LINK > www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOAVAV9gAmY

Some I do, some I don't; some put up links that I do trust to be legit; some I trust less. I always open the links that StarDreamer provides on his virtual tours because it's visible, before opening it, what it is. The links that are a bit irritating are the ones that are behind a pay wall; not much use if you're not a subscriber to that particular publication.
Whereever possible, I try to copy and paste any salient points from the online article, and also provide the url as well, so that readers can read further if they want to.

I won't open a link where text has been substituted for the name of the website nor anything from youtube. Those letters and numbers contain no clue about the content.

No

Well, here is a link to a video that I happened to notice on YouTube while looking for something else.

LINK > www.youtube.com/watch?v=quhnejd-h14

It is 3 minutes 12 seconds and it has the title

How was it made? Block printing William Morris Wallpaper

and shows wood blocks, ink preparation, the technique of inking the blocks and how multicolour wallpaper is made using those wooden prining blocks, including the method used for accurate alignment.

I found it to be a very interesting video.

No - I never click on any link on here.
I’m not interested enough - plus I’m over cautious.

I don't click on links unless I recognize the name of the poster who has put it there, or until enough others have viewed it for me to feel it must be safe.

A new poster, or at least a name I didn't recognize, started a couple of threads a few days ago, both with links in the opening post. I left the post straight away without clicking on them.

Like nanna8 I don't live in the UK and it is often the case that the access is limited so clicking on links is often a waste of time.

That said, I sometimes do read an article that someone has linked to, and I probably have posted links myself, but I often glean the contents from what others say about them further down the thread.

I think my attention span has shrunk a lot lately.

If I recognise the name of the poster and I am interested in the topic yes. I've read some interesting articles and learnt a bit.

If it's a name I don't recognise I just pass on by. Especially those obviously advertising something.

I do if I have time, but not usually links to videos or Youtube ones, as I tend to surf GN with the sound off so I'm not disturbing others. I do most of my surging in the evening, and by the time the morning comes and I am available to check out the link the thread has moved on.

Otherwise, yes, I check them out, but as others have said, it depends on whether I know the name of the poster or not. I link things up in my own posts as a way of showing my sources, but usually also cut and past the relevant bit into the post to save people reading the whole article, and for the benefit of those who do't trust links.

I won’t click on “random” links which somebody has chosen for me with the purpose of “educating” me or music links, playlists etc because how is anybody else to know my tastes?
If something is described first, or amusing or relevant to the subject of a thread, by all means, but if it is a section of text, I much prefer it to be cut and pasted, italicised as is the custom on GN with perhaps a link to enable further reading.

I do click on some political links to back up a stated view, which is often useful. If not I just discard them.

Every time someone follows a link to an external site they risk having cookies added to their device's memory. Not everyone understands the connection between web cookies and browsing activity, and the associated implications for data privacy and security. Some cyber attacks hijack cookies to get access to and track browsing sessions. I am very reluctant to follow links because of the security risk it poses to my own data security. I wonder if prolific posters of links are even aware or care that their methods are exposing others to danger?

I don’t want third party (aka tracking cookies) collecting data about my online behaviour, then passing it on to advertisers.

YouTube made $29 billion in 2021. Google made $260 billion. These companies claim they don’t sell your data but they certainly monetise it though indirect data sharing e.g. real time bidding. Beware of frequent requests to look at YouTube or use Google products. The more you use them the more you risk your data security.

I think the site managers should crack down on the number of links that are made here. Netiquette is clear, the odd link is allowed, but the guidelines are not being enforced. I don't mind an occasional link to a reputable news source to back up a discussion in News and Politics but anything else I ignore.

Very rarely. And only if it's something I'm really interested in. I'm quite wary of links.

Thanks for that, Firebird978. Interesting and informative and I will certainly heed your words. I am not really sure why we need all these links to prove a point, apart from anything else.

I read some links on politics and news. I’m unimpressed by links to US pseudo psychology articles because they’re not balanced or well researched.

Thank you as well, Firebird1978.
A timely reminder and a helpful explanation.

I am not in the slightest bit worried. I use you tube and Google multiple times a day.

Hear, hear. Thank you for explaining that Firebird . It is tempting to want to share things which we have come across eg on Youtube and which have interested or amused us, but like all good things, should not be overdone. It’s like sharing jokes - sometimes just not worth it.
I do think an indication of what is in a link is essential so that we can choose whether to pursue it or not.

People can post what they want within the guidelines I am afraid. We cant have posters deciding how many links are ok. Just dont click if you are worried.

I'm with M0nica and Iam - and I do use links. I also think it's useful to see where people get the info from.
It explains something about the "angle" of the person posting the link.

The internet is full of genuine information, plus some rubbish and some criminals (like Life, really). The best thing is to set your device's internet safety levels so it warns you of stuff from a doubtful source - and then to use your common sense.

In fact, just visiting an information site may get you unwanted ads and daily emails encouraging you to buy stuff you don't want, but is unlikely to expose you to hackers, viruses etc. That happens more after buying things at unbelievable bargain prices from sites that are unsecured (look for https, not http, and a little padlock or a shield before the site name in the name box of your browser) , or from replying to all those Facebook posts that ask what year you were born, how many children you have, what was your first car, your first school, the name of your dog/cat/mother-in-law - all things that add up to a profile of you, and are often set as security questions.

In Europe, every site you visit is required to ask you whether you wish to receive cookies. It takes a few more clicks to refuse them, but it is worth doing. Also every browser programme has ways of setting the level of security. Find out how yours works and set it. For extra protection, install a virus checker like Norton or McAfee and have it scan for trouble regularly.

On choosing which links to follow and which to avoid - If someone who usually posts sensible opinions or info adds a link as a source of more detail on what they have just said on a subject that interests me, then I follow it. If I trust their sense on the subject, then I trust them not to refer me to dodgy sites.

I do prefer to see a short account of what is on the page linked to, and who is the author of it. The link is their statement of where they found those details. and saying a bit about it shows that they have really been there.

If there is no link to a source, then it could just be an opinion, or something vaguely and wrongly remembered, like, "They say that . . . " Much of the misinformation that flies around would vanish if everyone asked "Do they? Who says?" and looked for the original spreader of that particular fake news.

Links to music, jokes, cute kittens and so on are a matter of taste. You won't miss much by not following links, but in a serious discussion you could be missing important research by (dare I say it) an expert.

Well said Elegran.

I often post an excerpt from an article, along with a link.
It's up to others to decide whether to click on it or not.

It's completely ridiculous to think of limiting the number of links on GN - just ignore them, it's not difficult, or report if you think they are spam.