Following the natural theme of the thread... we started with server age and that was debunked immediately... there is no need to debunk debunking if you agree with the original debunk.
But that opened up a domain age question... and I debunked that.
But that opened up a link age question... and I debunked that.
Well just because I make changes on a few hundred domain today... does not mean Googlebot JUMPs. I didn't force Google to recrawl the page... so if a page priority was monthly... that can reasonably be almost two months before Google crawls all pages to delete and credit and then recalculating that into into results
You have two counter balance philosophies working against your rational.
Businesses go out of business all the time and I eat up their "not so easily obtainable signals" and quite literally use it as easy as ****ting on your foot thus it fosters spam just as easy as fostering good wll.
As an example: Lehman Brothers was a well established brand and their domain lehman.com is due to expire.
I can bid on that, own it and using your philosophy to beat you to a pulp because that domain is 30 years old.
That the first counter.
The second counter is the laws of diminishing returns apply.
Even if history of anything is a variable it would be a single point NOT a point for each link as the latter would provide top results only from the older servers with the oldest domains because they also have a lock on the oldest potential links and you can never beat age... thus it would be 1. so easy to see this in results and 2. foolish for Google to bait results this way as you can buy any domain for the right price and the fortune 100 companies would own them all.
Thus the more you add to the mix the less impact it has to provide any returns for ordered ranks until the only time it is apparent is the difference between ranking #999 and #990 where you'll never get any viable returns as qualified traffic and sales conversions.