DRW vs LinkedIn – Stay down!
Increasingly, this is looking less like LinkedIn policy and more like “Daniel” enforcing his personal views. Additionally, it appears Daniel has no supervisory oversight to which one might appeal, which is an interesting corporate strategy within LinkedIn.
And who is this mysterious Daniel, anyway? We don’t know, although someone on Twitter found a Daniel ZX Lim, MSc on LinkedIn, based out of Singapore, whose profile indicates he represents their “Trust & Safety” group, and a Twitter account at @danielZXlim. It may be him. It may not. We don’t know.
Nonetheless, the back-and-forth continues, below.
DRW
Daniel
But it’s NOT false. There is no universal definition of “virtually” other than very small. Second – the CDC just released the Updated death rates by ages. I sent you the CDC data. Here’s a summary of that data. And … btw…. it IS virtually 0.
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/new-cdc-estimates-fatality-rate-covid-19-drops-again-and-may-surprise-you?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter
Every thread you picked up, I supported with data, citations and sent it to you. The coronavirus is “novel” – show me the expert that researched my claims and said they were false? It’s new. By definition very little is “false”.
What algorithm and research was used to identify “the false information”- can you send me the data that shows my claims are false? You must have it.
You are discriminating against me on the basis of political affiliation and not providing me with a policy I violated so you are leaning on “false data” which is 100% incorrect.
You don’t operate in a bubble. You have a boss and I will hire a lawyer and escalate this, at which point much higher people up in the company will most certainly get involved.
So. Respectfully. I ask again. Please elevate to your supervisor or provide me further data on the algorithm that suggest my data is “false”.
David
Reference # 200921-010177
Status: Closed View your case(s) on our Help Center
You may reply to this case for up to 14 days
Response (09/29/2020 04:01 CST)
Hi David,
Thanks for your response.
While I understand that this outcome may not be satisfactory to you, we would not have an additional level of contact for you to work with regarding this matter.
The content was identified as false information. Your appeal and the information provided was evaluated carefully and we will maintain our original decision.
Further information can be found here:
https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement
https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/34593
Please review the section “Learn more about being professional” Honesty and Authenticity It states the following:
…You may not use the services to share false content or information, including news stories, that presents untrue facts or events as though they are true or likely true.
Please see below the address to contact our Legal Department. Legal process may be served on LinkedIn in person, via certified mail, or express courier at our corporate headquarters:
LinkedIn Corporation
ATTN: Legal Dept.
1000 West Maude Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94085
USA
Regards,
Daniel
LinkedIn Member Safety and Recovery Consultant
DRW
Member (09/28/2020 11:46 CST)
Daniel
I’d like to escalate my appeal to a supervisor. I have posted for 2 years on the platform and have all the archives here: I reject the premise that “this content is not allowed”.
I have read the terms and professional conduct agreements and I have not violated a single one. Everything I have printed is professional and backed by data. I do not merit being banned under the policy.
My preference is not to need to get legal representation to clear up this misunderstanding but deplatforming me because you disagree with my stance, backed by science is not something we should accept as a society.
I look forward to hearing back from your supervisor.
Best
David
>
>
>
Member (09/28/2020 07:39 CST)
Daniel.
I’m still unclear. The first note said i violated for false information which clearly I supported that was not.
This not now says “keep it professional” but in the policy do’s and don’t s you haven’t pointed to a violation of the policy.
Specifically – what policy did I violate they has warranted a ban?
David
>
>
>
Response (09/28/2020 05:46 CST)
Hi David,
LinkedIn has reviewed your request to appeal the restriction placed on your account and will be maintaining our original decision. This means that access to the account will remain restricted.
We require all members to engage in a professional manner and this type of content is not allowed. For more information, please review LinkedIn’s Terms of Service: https://www.linkedin.com/legal/user-agreement and Professional Community Policies: https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/34593.
Regards,
Daniel
LinkedIn Member Safety and Recovery Consultant
DRW
Member (09/25/2020 15:58 CST)
Daniel
Given the facts of the case, I would love to expedite getting my account back online. I’d also love to chat with someone live and have a SVP come on my podcast to chat. With the election coming up – its a hot topic and a slippery slope.
Hope you have a great weekend!
David
>
>
>
Response (09/25/2020 07:27 CST)
Hi David,
Your appeal has been received and is currently under review. Please allow up to 14 days for us to contact you regarding the status of the account.
Thanks for your cooperation.
Regards,
Daniel
LinkedIn Member Safety and Recovery Consultant
DRW
Member (09/23/2020 09:23 CST)
Dear sir / madam
Final point in this. LinkedIn says you own your content on LinkedIn except they have a worldwide, transferable, basically blank check to distribute it and sell it for advertising. Could you cite what policy in the user agreement was violated? I think also pursuant to your policy, under California freedom of speech this would be resolved.
The article I reposted, written by a doctor, has links to all the source material and says very clearly it’s an opinion piece. I copied the text from the article and included it for reference. https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/494034-the-data-are-in-stop-the-panic-and-end-the-total-isolation%3famp
Thanks. I look forward to my account being reinstated.
David
Mr. Wood – Good for you for keeping up the fight! I can not believe with all of the other nonsense and not factual, or backed in formation, I see on linkedin they have singled you out for talking about facts. Anyway the regular public can help other than buying some #hottakeoftheday schwag?
I love my “gotten eaten by a shark – died of corona virus” shirt by the way!
Another consideration is that #ClinkedIn is owned by Microsoft and even though he stepped down Bill Gates still wields power there. And BG seems to have a vested interest in making sure COVID remains a going concern from the time he was a part of Event 201 in October of last year. I would love to see the discovery on a lawsuit and would recommend searching for others on the platform that may have also had the same fate.
I’d hang them with their own words “false information”.
Here’s the definition of “information” I just pulled up on Microsoft:
“Facts provided or learned about something or someone”.
Based on that, I would assert that there is no such thing as “false information” because how could facts be false?
There is no “Daniel”.
I smelled a rat when your comments and feed disappeared. Somewhat ironic, considering the plethora of rubbish and disinformation on LI, which seems to have increased exponentially in recent times. Continue the fight. I would hope that you would also have a wide array of support including from those who don’t necessarily agree with your opinions; isn’t that what free speech is supposed to be about?
Concur. No one should agree with everything I say but everyone should be worried when you lose the ability to say them.
By this notion, “…including news stories, that presents untrue facts or events…” every false news story that is posted on LI jeopardizes the poster and they (including direct news organization posters) should be kicked off of LI.
Scott Atlas… the author of the piece I posted … is an advisor to the White House!!
First, they Came – a 2020 version of a poem by pastor Martin Niemöller – a anti Nazi German resistor
First, they came for the Covid Sceptics
But I did not speak out, because I was not a Covid Sceptic
Then they came for the Climate Sceptics
But I did not speak out, because I was not a climate sceptic
Then they came for the social conservatives
But I did not speak out, because I was not a conservative
Then they came for the religious people
But I did not speak out, because I was secular
Then they came for me
And there was no one left To speak out for me
Great poem. And totally true. Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequence but th consequence shouldn’t be losing your account when you quote the CDC and an advisor to the White House…