I am in catch up mode on this, as started a couple of weeks late. One observation is that some of the examples people have posted here seem to me to be less "link posts" than "posts with hyperlinks in them".
The point of a link post is to take another blog post and write something related to that.
There are some examples here where people have included (sometimes several) hyperlinks but not referred to them. In one example (DailyHarold) the links serve to interrupt the flow of what Harold is writing and so risk leading people away rather than building authority. As 2 of the links are repeated and just go to Wikipedia rather than another blog, they act more like those double underiined hyperinks (not sure what they are called). I am not wanting to be critical here but constructive - Harold has suggested he is going to use this approach going forward in all his posts - it would be worth him reading the original lesson again to really understand what a link post means. Otherwise he may risk driving people away rather than drawing them in.
I used to avoid link posts for the usual fears of driving people to other blogs, but have found some great results with them, when used judiciously. I think they can build authority, be generous in sharing useful information with readers and of course draw in more traffic.
Make it and mend it because life's too good to throw away