Comments on: LinkedIn’s Restrictions on Connections http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/2009/10/linkedins-restrictions-on-connections/ Training, tips and techniques to help you turn contacts into clients, leads into deals and referrals into business partners. Sat, 08 May 2010 04:14:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: blanko http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/2009/10/linkedins-restrictions-on-connections/comment-page-1/#comment-705 blanko Sat, 08 May 2010 04:14:21 +0000 http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/?p=311#comment-705 LinkedIn imposed a limit simply because they can't handle more connections then that. Their software has limitations and obviously with the focus on going IPO, there is no focus on scalability or quality. What did you expect anyway? LinkedIn imposed a limit simply because they can’t handle more connections then that. Their software has limitations and obviously with the focus on going IPO, there is no focus on scalability or quality. What did you expect anyway?

]]> By: Rick Daucunas http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/2009/10/linkedins-restrictions-on-connections/comment-page-1/#comment-696 Rick Daucunas Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:10:34 +0000 http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/?p=311#comment-696 I would suspect that LinkedIn made a business decision on limiting the amount of connections one may have. I believe it is a wrong decision and should be dropped! I would suspect that LinkedIn made a business decision on limiting the amount of connections one may have. I believe it is a wrong decision and should be dropped!

]]> By: Steven Burda, MBA http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/2009/10/linkedins-restrictions-on-connections/comment-page-1/#comment-692 Steven Burda, MBA Sat, 09 Jan 2010 03:18:55 +0000 http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/?p=311#comment-692 Ward, DON'T suspect anything until you talk to "the guy" first. Contact me via email, then comment. Ever read this? http://www.cio.com/article/print/470122 or http://www.foxmbasa.com/conference/speakers.html Ward, DON’T suspect anything until you talk to “the guy” first. Contact me via email, then comment.

Ever read this?
http://www.cio.com/article/print/470122
or
http://www.foxmbasa.com/conference/speakers.html

]]> By: Ward http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/2009/10/linkedins-restrictions-on-connections/comment-page-1/#comment-691 Ward Wed, 23 Dec 2009 06:23:37 +0000 http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/?p=311#comment-691 This guy needs to get a life Looking at his profile with 2755 recommendations and his apparently young age from the pic, I would suspect that this was a game to him and not a profile that actually was useful in the manner intended by the site. This guy needs to get a life Looking at his profile with 2755 recommendations and his apparently young age from the pic, I would suspect that this was a game to him and not a profile that actually was useful in the manner intended by the site.

]]> By: Brad http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/2009/10/linkedins-restrictions-on-connections/comment-page-1/#comment-670 Brad Tue, 27 Oct 2009 03:24:49 +0000 http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/?p=311#comment-670 Arbitrarily? I am assuming that this probably isn't arbitrarily applied but instead was something that they decided as a business when they created the site. I agree that it doesn't make sense and I don't like it, but I am using their product for free and as such, I have to deal with the restrictions that they place. If you don't like it, then create a competitor without this limitation. If enough people truly do have a problem with LinkedIn over this then you should have no problem taking over their customer base. My guess is that this limitation doesn't really affect 99% of the users of LinkedIn and they will never approach these limitations. Hopefully Steven's letter will get them to lift the limits, but I have my doubts. The letter has a ton of grammatical errors and to me he comes off as extremely pompous and arrogant. Further, I have a really hard time believing that he can't find 3 people out of the thousands he is connected to that he doesn't really need so that he can connect to his father, sister, etc... Last things, he is seriously comparing his ability to have unlimited connections (judging from his page solely for the purpose of bragging about how unstoppable he is)to the Chinese governments censorship? This man truly has no perspective. Arbitrarily? I am assuming that this probably isn’t arbitrarily applied but instead was something that they decided as a business when they created the site. I agree that it doesn’t make sense and I don’t like it, but I am using their product for free and as such, I have to deal with the restrictions that they place.
If you don’t like it, then create a competitor without this limitation. If enough people truly do have a problem with LinkedIn over this then you should have no problem taking over their customer base.

My guess is that this limitation doesn’t really affect 99% of the users of LinkedIn and they will never approach these limitations. Hopefully Steven’s letter will get them to lift the limits, but I have my doubts. The letter has a ton of grammatical errors and to me he comes off as extremely pompous and arrogant. Further, I have a really hard time believing that he can’t find 3 people out of the thousands he is connected to that he doesn’t really need so that he can connect to his father, sister, etc…

Last things, he is seriously comparing his ability to have unlimited connections (judging from his page solely for the purpose of bragging about how unstoppable he is)to the Chinese governments censorship? This man truly has no perspective.

]]> By: Rory http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/2009/10/linkedins-restrictions-on-connections/comment-page-1/#comment-669 Rory Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:49:46 +0000 http://www.linktoprosper.com/blog/?p=311#comment-669 This is truly insane!! How dare they restrict anyone's ability to connect because they have arbitrarily decided how many should be "allowed" in someone's network.......? This is truly insane!! How dare they restrict anyone’s ability to connect because they have arbitrarily decided how many should be “allowed” in someone’s network…….?

]]>