Communities versus Groups?

« Back to Previous Page
2
0

I just noticed a new addition to my feed, that is "communities" that I follow. I follow selected "topics", now...

Please to read the entire article.

Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 12:00 am
1 views
0
Private comment
Apparently Linkedin is planning to create global tags to create "Communities" and segment the feed.
This is not really new since they already tried similar things in the past and it was not working well.

1- If the tags are set only by Linkedin this will be a failure. Since there is no moderation and no way to have a "clean" tag . It will be a new opportunity for spammer.

2- If the tags are set freely by the user it will be hashtag, the same of Twitter. This could be interesting if they let also let users to create lists of people to follow.

But, I will keep using Twitter. To create a good list it takes a lot of time. Linkedin probably will change his mind again and again. Linkedin has already an history of creating problems to his most devoted users. Tags to aggregate personal contacts inside Linkedin was removed in the free plan.

In both the case this new "communities" will be a competitor for groups, so there will be less motivation to build a group and to be in a group
Marked as spam
Posted by Enrico Filippucci (Discussions: 0, Comments: 13)
Replied on June 7, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Yes, Mike Restivo, the same questions popped immediately to my mind upon happening upon the newly introduced "communities" structure -- again introduced without an iota of explanation.

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/follow/?

The structure of these "communities" appears to be eerily close to that of autonomous groups. And it would be appropriate, I believe, for a LinkedIn "Community Manager" such as Sophie Bonnet to explain how Groups will be differentiated from "Communities" and whether or not they will exist in a de facto competition with one another -- which I believe will ultimately be to the detriment of Groups. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 7, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
For the record, Mike, LI has already started arbitrarily manipulating involvement in "Communities" -- no doubt in accord with its own agenda, whatever that may be.

I have been using the "Your Communities" and "Hashtags You Follow" boxes that appear on my home page to cull communities that LI has decided I should follow. But LI continues to arbitrarily modify my selections and de-selections without my consent, adding back hashtags I've deleted and adding communities that I've elected not to follow.

Obviously, an autocratic and manipulative leopard cannot change its spots. And although I am, perhaps, reading too much into this, I believe it also belies any genuine interest on the part of LI to re-establish Groups in any reasonably functional (read independent, free of global algorithmically-controlled) form. Good luck to us all!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 7, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I, as usual fully agree with you PHIL FRIEDMAN, with the allowance that communities' structure and purpose either obvious or not so obvious, and groups' structure can co-exist for different and non competing if not even compatible(?) purposes. I find groups to be THE driver of UX involvement and satisfaction to specialized learning, which adds significant monetizable value to LinkedIn.com, much more than the global sized list of Microsoft OS subscribers only and integration of LinkedIn profiles with Microsoft's CRM alone. use of long form articles coupled with available access by all subscribers who choose to search and add them to their feed. Lack of propagation has killed publishing on LinkedIn for practical purposes and thereby killed the additional source of innovative, disruptive and monetizable added value to LinkedIn ad prospects' sales campaigns' revenue to Linkedin and thus to Microsoft shareholders. I find no comfort in NDAs; appears to hide unwelcome changes.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Mike, I agree that "communities" and "Groups" could (could, not will) co-exist in a peaceful, mutually supplemental relationship. But what I see is that the launch of "communities" (which is clearly intended to run on autopilot -- or perhaps artificial unintelligence ) should give pause to those here and in other LIGOMM groups who think that we will ever see Groups restored to their original owner- and manager-run independence and autonomy, which BTW was what made many of the more successful groups so productive in terms of knowledge sharing and engagement.

Many believe that NDAs function as gags to premature sharing of great things to come, but my instinct is that in this case, the NDAs are actually earplugs (or blinders) intended to help LI move forward with what it has already determined the Groups redux will look like... damn the torpedos, full speed ahead. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I just have my suspicions that groups will be replaced by communities; take them or leave them. Although a possible gain for publishers, without full elective notification to all subscribers who select a given author, even communities will be sub optimal experiences, but much better than nothing for self promotion, even to limited audience like at present. sigh. Groups advocates and creators/managers must investigate other forum software on personal web sites that will approximate groups functionality, even allowing for paid subscriptions too. Just my opinion. There are other collaborative initiatives afoot at present.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Yes, again I agree, Mike. The issue of "elective notifications" simply cannot be minimized. Current experience publishing outside of groups is not precisely on point, but it does make a point about why there is pressure building for alternative collaborative initiatives. To wit, I currently have a total of somewhat more than 4,500 followers and 1st order connections on LinkedIn, the majority of whom are colleagues in the marine industry. The last several articles I published in the article (nee Pulse) feed garnered about 50 views or less each (compared to the thousands, sometimes tens of thousands of views I used to rack up). The reason is clearly LI's algorithmic over-ride of my followers self-elections to receive notifications of my postings. (... continued pt. II)
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Mike Restivo -- Pt II.

Contrast this with the fact that, when I post the same kind of professionally-oriented material in the post (Update) feed, I can drive views into the thousands by using tag-blasts to a small portion (maybe a hundred or so) of my followers and 1st order connections.

The implications of this are enormous for people who are serious about using LI for inbound marketing. They are also relevant for LIGOMMs who want to build robust, stable, meaningful groups. What has to be recognized by the "new" groups restructuring team is that it takes a tremendous effort on the part of LIGOMMs to run an effective group of any size... and without independent control being accorded to those LIGOMMs, it just isn't worth that effort and time. And nothing the LI marketeers say can change that. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Exactly!
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I just noticed that I cannot edit or "like" my own posts to groups. What is this 1994? Facebook has long form posts and edits everywhere. Sigh
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
As we contemplate the potential performance of "Communities", Mike and all, you might be interested in the results of an experiment I started yesterday.

I posted a 3-part series of mine on boosting small-business profits as a "collection" on Google+. I then shared the Google+ collection to 1) the LI Update (Post) feed, and 2) separately in the #management Community. In the Update feed, I bypassed Algorithmic choke-down by means of a tag-blast in the comments to about 100 of my 4,500 followers and 1st level connections, whilst in the #management Community, I relied entirely on LI's robo-distribution to the claimed #management following of some 32 million. The results at the end of 24 hours are as follows:

Views in the #management Community - 118
Views in Update (Post) Feed - 1,004

cont... pt II

Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Mike Restivo - pt II -

In short, organic distribution via my own network delivered almost TEN TIMES GREATER DISTRIBUTION than the robo-distribution in Communities for the same period of time.

This tells me that Communities will never do what Groups could do if LI restored Groups to the structure and autonomy that they had originally. It also tells me that, for that very reason, LI will never restore Groups to the structure and autonomy that they enjoyed when I first became a group owner. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 8, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Excellent work PHIL FRIEDMAN and most discouraging vis a vis communities propagation. When status updates, alias personal/business news releases as I call them get about 10 times or more than that of communities or groups, either human or algo driven, it begs the most fundamental question as to what anti-linking purpose is served by LinkedIn? Ya gotta work hard at being anti social, anti-business, anti-connection. Already in rant mode, sorry for same to the optimists reading, but reading is what almost all members of social media do. It is too easy to be of the understanding that this tech advanced period is a shared experience. It is not. The proverbial 90% members of all social media are readers and have no interest or motivation natively to contact meaningfully with anybody beyond circle of friends beyond social media, especially any kind of promotional contacts from business. For most persons, the social, career, business advantages of social media are left untouched. Cont...
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
continuing ... that doom and gloom demonstrates the challenges involved in any kind of promotion from job seeking to business and that considerable adaptive and adept skills are required even for relatively small rewards. My experience suggests taking various media platforms as they are and work with and through/around limitations but stop waiting for gate-keepers of any kind to hold back the innate success that all active business and social activists possess and exhibit constantly. To all these I congratulate you all for your extraordinary and always supportive, encouraging and edifying efforts. I try not to leave on a down note. So write once and republish at the risk of duplication of same over several groups, communities, platforms. One person's disturbance is another's promotion to cultivating a warm prospect's subliminal responsiveness. A lot of patience is required among the readers ... there are many others trying to help bro bono, supply goods and services, job seeking.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I thank all members' patience for tolerating my off topic tangents; often it is the implications and their solutions(?) that are more interesting and edifying than assertions of problems and the never ending expectation of solutions to same or at least the restoration to UX of years ago only. Sigh
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
"communities" will have an advantage over new groups, they will be visible from all Linkedin users and probably on internet. Unfortunately, Spam and fake accounts will be the new normal on Linkedin 's "communities".

It would be much better to have simply a good search tool for post and Groups content.

Twitter is working perfectly with few problems (spam and fake accounts), Linkedin strategy on communities will only maximize the worst side of Twitter.
Marked as spam
Posted by Enrico Filippucci (Discussions: 0, Comments: 13)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
@Enrico Filippuci > “[Communities] ... will be visible from all Linkedin users and probably on internet ... “

Sorry, Enrico, but you have no basis on which to say that, except hope. LI has an established history of preventing that from happening for all but their anointed Influencers. Witness my recent experiment in which a post of mine in #management returned only 153 views against a nominal following of 32 million, but the same post distributed organically to only about 100 of my followers via a tag-blast returned nearly 1,100 views in the first 28 hours.

Views are a matter of numbers. If LI #management was showing my post to all its 32 million members, the view count would have have been in the thousands if not tens of thousands. But they weren’t. Which tells us that LI didn’t distribute to all the users who follow #management. And I am confident LI never will. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
… and that would be because if LI distributed every post to every relevant "following" member, we would each have feeds that we could never keep up with ...
Marked as spam
Posted by Peter Murchland (Discussions: 1, Comments: 47)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
The lack of indented reply structure deprecates any thread. Sigh. Your observation is correct Peter Murchland. Placing messages from anything in feeds that scroll by without practical intervention, save leaning on the "back" selection for an open ended length of time: Wholly unacceptable. Easier is to dynamically create pages of one's followed messages, groups posts and communities posts. Just as one clicks on show all contacts/followers, or show more communities or discover more topics, and so on. This is using the code already available, just change some objects and method calls. An adolescent coder can easily do this. No scrolling more than a few pages which serve as notifications by definition, no need for separate notifications. There is a tension between polite expression and criticisms without solutions. That LinkedIn refuses(?) to use already in place code for multi-purposes is disappointing. Same applies to excuses why groups integration with main apps is years from now.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 9, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Everyone needs to make sure you get at least a complete weekly export of all your data. None of us have any clue as to the ultimate fate of Linkedin but I know many of us have a lot invested in it (read brer rabbit and the tar-baby) and we need to make sure we don't get caught short or stuck.
Marked as spam
Posted by John Jones (Discussions: 368, Comments: 3041)
Replied on June 11, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Not sure why LI appears to have rebranded #hashtags as communities, makes no sense to me. In case anyone isn't sure how they work, I posted about it: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6410600173319307264
Marked as spam
Posted by John Marrett (Discussions: 0, Comments: 7)
Replied on June 11, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Hash tagged words are NOT communities just because you say they are. They are simply topics. Is this a nefarious plot by LI to subvert and repurpose groups into topics? I do not think so. This is simply a new and alternative way for people to interact and share information.

We need to give the new person at LI a chance to rebuild the groups functionality of Linkedin. They appear to be trying to do something. I wish them the very best of luck and we need LI to succeed as there is simply no alternative for a professional network. If groups go away, that is ok. We will all adapt. The moral of this continuing story is to not depend on LI for your livelihood. Let it be one of many social media venues that you consume and make your own independent community in wordpress made up of your network from Linkedin. This way you will not get caught short.
Marked as spam
Posted by John Jones (Discussions: 368, Comments: 3041)
Replied on June 13, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
John and Mike -- The omens of the last hurrah for Groups are all there... 1) #Communities has been rolled out for some users, 2) Sophie's title, in case you haven't noticed, is "Community Manager", and most telling of all, 3) references to group "owners" and "managers" have been completely dropped in favor of talking about "admins".

This last is hugely important, as it signals a deeply-held management perspective which is that groups will never again be seen as even partially "belonging" or being proprietary to those who create and nurture them. Instead, LIGOMMs are all being demoted to unpaid minions working for and at the pleasure of LinkedIn. The rest is an implementation of DOD. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 14, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Now given the experimenting/re-inventing groups needlessly, to some, me included, this does not prevent a return to better groups day, well … theoretically. For my part and others like PHIL FRIEDMAN, many years' indifference to the monetizable value of groups vis a vis user experience added value to LinkedIn makes no business sense, especially to a publicly traded company. Everybody knows now that in most social media, the users are the commodity to be resold to third parties, unknown to us. Just best to take control of one's data asap and manage along social media's various limitations as best a possible. Doing this with severely handicapped groups for an undeterminable time, 10, 20, 30 years? Not my choice to put it politely. Sigh
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 14, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Peter Murchland > " and that would be because if LI distributed every post to every relevant "following" member, we would each have feeds that we could never keep up with ..."

Peter, that myth is pure poppycock, fostered by LI in defense of its authoritarian decision to over-ride the self-elections of members as to whose postings they want to receive. The only people who receive "too many" notifications are those who connect with and follow others indiscriminately in the hope of building a pool of connections whom they want to spam with advertising and marketing or for whatever other pea-brained reason they may have, such as collecting a million connections.

Moreover, it is possible for each individual to adjust what he or she receives in the nature of notifications. No, the agenda goes much deeper than UX. It reaches down to the desire to control who sees what and who becomes popular -- in the service of supporting LI's Influencer marketing program.

Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 14, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
John Jones > "...Hash tagged words are NOT communities just because you say they are. They are simply topics."

John, neither Mike nor I am talking about topical hashtags. You may not have seen it yet (as usual with LI, the roll-out is piecemeal), but there is a new feature called "Communities", in which articles can be assigned to pre-specified communities using the pre-designated hashtags. https://www.linkedin.com/feed/follow/

You are correct that one can no longer tag a post with just any hashtag in order to associate it with others bearing the same hashtag.

As to giving the "new" LI person a chance, who is that person you're talking about? And how does being realistic or even pessimistic about what is upcoming prevent LI from making the improvements that LI marketing reps like Sophie are promising?
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 14, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I just want to add a little more observation regarding Hashtag Communities or simply "communities" as the "hashtag" is their denomination. Only LinkedIn created (?) approved (?) communities exist at present. On my suggested communities to follow, formerly topics, "#careerdevelopment" was offered, but that is a term that I use and no such community exists, at present. Why was I offered a Community to follow that does not exist? Does some mechanism exist that allows or approves new communities upon demand? Who demands that which does not yet exist and no explanation is at present given how additional new communities can be created. By fiat of LinkedIn alone and/or LinkedIn response to some level of number of requests for similar Hastag names? Any informed information form anybody is useful. Help is requested from anybody. I am being extra polite. No editing facility in groups Ahhhhgggrrrr...
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Well I just did the obvious thing … write a status paragraph, I call them news releases, on "career development" and appended "#careerdevelopment". The #careerdevelopment community dialog box appears and I click on "follow", the repost my status paragraph, hastag and all. Ok, now I look at the communities that I follow and surprise: #careerdevelopment" is listed under the "show all" selection. I click it and back in the careerdeelopment community I go and see my paragraph and some others, naturally, as it is an intuitive name. Let's see if they persist and for how long … Hmmmm interesting. So what happened to "Influencers" status? Communities are the new Influencers so to speak: Influence by edifying topic/communities rather than numbers alone with little to no value added. More hmmmm. hey PHIL FRIEDMAN: Try this out. Comments invited as usual. Some good possibilities here, maybe by accident, but worth supporting.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Now ONLY the first community referenced, among several if added, receives one's status paragraph(s), ahem, rather long form ARTICLES and images, if desired, so no automatic posting, ahem PUBLISHING, over several communities with one published long form article, unlike Wordpress. Ok ... just copy, then publish the same article several times with the appropriate community it is intended to reach. Not automatic, but one can appeal to a much larger audience than one's followers' feed ONLY. Hmmmm, sounds interesting and promising ...
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Case matters for communities: "#Innovation" and "#innovation" are two separate innovation communities which do exist to be followed. I suggest capitalizing the communities' names to differentiate them from Twitter hashtags. This seems to be the most prevalent practice.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Try creating NEW communities with a suitable status paragraph for test, then long form article if desired and follow them. See them in your "all posts activity" page and in your "see all communities you follow" page.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
PHIL FRIEDMAN - Nothing to do with "notifications" - my remark was about the number of posts in each person's feed.
Marked as spam
Posted by Peter Murchland (Discussions: 1, Comments: 47)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Peter, then I see even less validity in your concern. With hundreds of thousands of members posting, one’s feed obviously requires filtering if one is to be able to focus on anything of interest. But I’d prefer to set my own filters and choose which and whose content I want to see — and not have my elections over-ridden by LI. That, BTW, does not need to affect your choice to have LI run your feed, as a simple switch could be used to have LI manage your filters algorithmically or for you to elect to set your own priorities and preferences. Cheers!
Marked as spam
Posted by PHIL FRIEDMAN (Discussions: 1, Comments: 18)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
How many (a range is fine) topics would you want to nominate and how many people (range) would you want to follow?
Marked as spam
Posted by Peter Murchland (Discussions: 1, Comments: 47)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
At present anyone can create an unlimited number of communities just as groups. maybe that can/will be limited, but not at present. Let the public decide what and who to follow without any limit as to both the number of communities and groups and how many followers one can follow if they desire. the more of both the greater the engagement the greater added equity value to LinkedIn. Using pop up/pull down menus anywhere that do not use both horizontal and vertical scrolls is obsolete. Some of my menus of 20+ just get cut of the screen. Ya gotta work hard to be that sloppy at coding, the scrolling is BUILT IN as an object for the last 30 years. sigh. that way hundreds of favourite communities can be listed on one page. Just add multiple screens ad infinitum, just a counter is needed for programming, ya know page = page +1. This is basic coding. also add select button to save to file, a desired option to archive any search that returns thousands of results. continued ….
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Continued: Handling hundreds of thousands of communities and/or groups as entities is relatively easy. Managing groups is difficult and can be incredibly challenging. I speak only to the site's readers' interests and claim that there is no satiety limitation of their reading/informational wants. Hopefully filters will prevent rude/unacceptable names, say from a multi-million name look-up table. The communities' feeds only go to those who follow them, not general feed … um in theory. Already, my own #careerdevelopment community post was also added to my regular feed. Some tweaks seem to be in order, especially to prevent spam. I am only learning and have no authoritative info from Linkedin itself, so each to their own taste, where unlimited can appear superfluous. I want to choose what I read and post and to whom I post with as best propagation to following members as possible and searchable communities and groups so all members can chose for themselves what and who to follow.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
oh … as to the list of Communities I am following, 108 at present, only about HALF were topics that I had previously followed, however I like the Algorithms' choices, obviously (?) based upon my posts and comments. I could jest about being unconsciously absorbed into the "Matrix of Social Media", but the reality is just too troubling, with privacy, data mining, profile management to sales and propaganda targeting. Shudder.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/190

General Limits for LinkedIn Groups

Various limits for LinkedIn Groups are listed below. We believe these limits can accommodate those with a wide variety of interests and yet still encourage quality group management and engagement.

Group limits for members:

How many groups can I own and/or manage at one time? 30.
How many groups can I be a member of at one time? 100.
Note: Once you reach 100, you would need to withdraw from one before you'd be able to request to join a new group.
How many pending groups can I have at one time? 10.
How many mentions can I use in one conversation? 20.

Group limits per group:

How many owners can a group have? 1.
How many admins can a group have? 10.
*** How many members can be in a given group? 20,000.***

Last updated: June 12, 2017

[*** Group membership size can exceed the default 20k limit subject to negotiation with LI]
Marked as spam
Posted by Samantha Bailey (Discussions: 1, Comments: 7)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/69689

Network Size Limit

To ensure an optimal site experience, members can have a maximum of 30,000 1st-degree connections. We recommend that you only connect with individuals you know and trust, as outlined in the LinkedIn User Agreement. As an ongoing practice it would be beneficial for you to manage your connection lists and maintain those that bring you the highest relationship value. Check out more on how to remove connections.

While there is a limit to the number of 1st-degree connections you can have, the number of people who can follow you is unlimited. Members who are following you can view, like, or comment on what you share publicly on LinkedIn. Allowing members to follow you is a great way to reach a larger audience.

Learn more about the similarities and differences between following and connecting and how to manage follower settings.

Last updated: June 30, 2016

Marked as spam
Posted by Samantha Bailey (Discussions: 1, Comments: 7)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Thanks Samantha Bailey! Network size limit: No problem vis a vis followers unlimited. Contacts limit may be acceptable to many or unacceptable to some, it is a consequence of email volume sent out by LinkedIn, to its disparagement. Ok, a structural limitation, no indifference to UX. Group limits for members: 30 groups owned and managed is a practical limit in my opinion. The rest of the items are too low. group Limits per Group: Number of members is too low. the rest of the limits are ok in my opinion.
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 15, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
I am agnostic to communities over/instead of Groups. I did not add any hashtags: They were computed from my text itself by Algorithms!? From "my posts" menu:

Restivo

Owner Restivo Wealth Management Co. Restivo Career Development Advisory Co. Restivo Media Co. Author 6+ Free Ibooks
6d
It is most emotionally valuable to give appreciation, honour and dignity to anyone who influences one, however slightly. We do not know the positive effect we have on others, which feedback is the anchor to life and life line to same that in times of a person's suffering under pressures will stand with them against doubt, depression and loneliness. Tell all of them NOW of one's love and appreciation. The dead cannot hear one, but can be honoured posthumously by one in their name to others, specially secretly needing of same desperately. We must teach the living to live likewise in unselfish love constantly. #pressure #living #dignity #anchors
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 16, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
The unilateral redirection of a post by LinkedIn computers' Algos poses questions as to how even one's text/media can be manipulated for purposes unknown if not suspected. Helpful redistribution/propagation? I will do that on my own. Talk about spam, but would only the first community get the post from my status post? I do not even follow any of the appended hashtags. I got data scraped! Oh oh. Communities can be collections of preference profiles, into which even unintentional posts can and will get funnelled for resale packaging. Whatever is going on is moving rather apace. I do not want words or tags put into my mouth/media on LinkedIn. Disturbing. Maybe a pause in rollout velocity and full LinkedIn explanation needed?
Marked as spam
Posted by Mike Restivo (Discussions: 1, Comments: 8)
Replied on June 16, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
The idea of segmenting the feed is a good one.
Marked as spam
Posted by Anne Thornley-Brown MBA (Discussions: 1, Comments: 9)
Replied on June 17, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
Let me start by saying that I am a strong advocate for consumer choice and for the development and provision of capabilities which enable greater choice given the wide diversity of membership and interests. To some extent, we are doing this all the time - choosing what notifications to pursue, choosing what items in our feed to give attention, choosing what topics / groups / themes (hashtags), articles to keep abreast of and which to ignore, which to post in and which to let slide. But there is scope for more choice - offering different views (by most recent post, by topic size, by most unread topic, by author, by topic title, etc) - each of these enable members to find and follow content of most interest to them.

That said, there is so much being posted that there is an inevitable need for filtering, for algorithms, for bringing to our attention that which we would never know to ask for if we did our own filtering, …

Marked as spam
Posted by Peter Murchland (Discussions: 1, Comments: 47)
Replied on June 19, 2018 8:00 pm
0
Private comment
There is a need for balance, for intelligent design, and for intelligent consumption and participation.

[And there is a need for removing the totally frustrating and annoying post limits that force a simple, cogent contribution to be split into several unmeaningful posts and thereby waste time and energy (both mental and emotional) of LI's supposedly most valued resource - LI members!!]
Marked as spam
Posted by Peter Murchland (Discussions: 1, Comments: 47)
Replied on June 19, 2018 8:00 pm
« Back to Previous Page