r/LinkedInTips

Ok. This is my personal observation. Whenever I see a post from someone with 5,000+ LinkedIn followers, the content seems to attract an audience from the same industry.

For example, someone running a paid-ads agency may create content to attract brands, but most of the people commenting are other agency owners or professionals from the same industry.

I don’t know whether this is limited to a few accounts, but I’ve noticed it across many of them. Around 95% of the comments come from people in the same industry, not from the companies the account is actually targeting.

Are you getting inbound leads from LinkedIn?

The old connect-pitch-follow-up routine feels tired now. Most people can spot it within seconds, and the generic “just following up” message rarely gets a reply.

Lately, the outreach that seems to work better starts before the connection request.

Checking someone’s recent posts, company updates, or role first makes a big difference. If there is something genuinely relevant, engaging with it naturally gives the connection request a reason to exist.

A short note explaining why the connection makes sense usually lands better than a blank request or an instant pitch.

So one Thing i Notice is Post base Targeting is give best result. So you can try post base and event base targeting to get best result.

After someone accepts, jumping straight into a sales message kills the conversation. A better move is asking something specific about their work or sharing a relevant observation. The aim is not to book a call in message one; it is to give them a reason to keep replying.

Follow-ups matter too. Instead of reminding someone about the last message, adding new context works better: a useful thought, a question about their process, or a comment on something they recently posted. That turns the follow-up from a nudge into part of an actual conversation.

One challenge with this approach is scale. Personalization is easy for ten prospects, but once outreach spans several LinkedIn accounts and campaigns, it becomes hard to remember who replied, what they said, and which sequence they belong to. Losing that context turns even a good strategy into generic messaging.

Curious what others are seeing this year. Is engagement-first outreach working better, or are personalized cold messages still getting stronger replies? Or is content-led inbound quietly beating both?

I made a mistake for a long time: I treated LinkedIn outreach like email. Send request, wait, follow up, repeat.

The problem was that my follow-ups had no context. They were just “following up on my previous message,” which gives the other person no reason to reply.

So I changed the workflow.

Now, before I send a connection request, I spend a minute checking their recent posts, company page, or role. If they have posted something relevant, I comment or react first. Then I send a connection request with a short note tied to that context.

After they accept, I do not pitch immediately. I send one short message about something specific to their situation, such as a challenge their role usually deals with or something they mentioned in a post.

The follow-up is where I noticed the biggest difference. Instead of bumping the old message, I add new context: a relevant observation, a question about their process, or a useful idea related to what they shared. It feels less like chasing and more like continuing a conversation.

I also started keeping outreach organized by campaign and account, because once you manage multiple LinkedIn profiles, it becomes easy to lose track of who was interested, who already replied, and which sequence they are in. Having that context in one place has made follow-ups much easier to personalize.

I’m not saying this works for every niche, but it has made my outreach feel less robotic and more conversational.

What follow-up style are you using now? Do you prefer adding new context in each follow-up, or keeping it simple with a short reminder?

>Hi everyone,
>
>I'm looking for advice from anyone who has successfully resolved a permanent LinkedIn account restriction.
>
>I've had my LinkedIn account since 2019 and have used it for professional networking, freelancing, job opportunities, and building my professional network.
>
>My account was restricted, and LinkedIn eventually asked me to verify my identity. I completed the requested identity-verification process and contacted LinkedIn Support.
>
>The only potential policy issue I can identify is a job opportunity I reposted from Facebook. I included an email address for applicants because that was how the original post was structured, without properly considering LinkedIn's rules around job posts. If that violated a policy, it was an oversight rather than an attempt to misuse the platform.
>
>I explained this to LinkedIn and asked them to tell me what specific content or activity caused the restriction.
>
>Their response was that my account violated the User Agreement and Professional Community Policies and, because of the "number and/or severity" of the violations, it would remain restricted.
>
>I appealed again and asked for the specific violation. They reviewed the appeal but upheld the restriction without identifying the content/activity that caused it.
>
>This account matters a lot to me professionally. I'm currently studying Computer Science and working in open-source software engineering, and I've built years of legitimate professional connections and recommendations on the account.
>
>I'm completely willing to correct or remove anything that unintentionally violated LinkedIn's policies. I just want the opportunity for a meaningful review and to understand what actually triggered the permanent restriction.
>
>Has anyone dealt with a similar situation and successfully reached a different LinkedIn support/escalation channel after the standard appeal was denied?
>
>I'd particularly appreciate hearing from people who had a permanent restriction reversed.
>
>Thanks for any advice.