Decision Maker


Our mission is simple: connect the world's professionals to make them more productive and successful.

Does LinkedIn have the power to decide or influence something you want to change? Start a petition to this decision maker.Start a petition
Petitioning Hani Durzy

LinkedIn: Protect your users from stalkers and help keep victims safe

Every day, LinkedIn members are being stalked and threatened. Without a blocking feature, like ones available on other social media sites, these stalkers are able to see where their "prey" works, in which city they work, when they change jobs, when they move, etc. When being stalked and living in fear, it is easy to see how scary this situation can be. Adding a blocking feature is important for the millions of LinkedIn users around the world who are being stalked yet have no control to stop it.  Having written to LinkedIn customer service about blocking a user, I was told I was only able to block a member if that member is prohibited from having a LinkedIn account by virtue of a court order. This is ludicrous and to the extreme. We know from other social media outlets how easy it is to enable this feature. Why LinkedIn is so against keeping their users safe, I don't know. Users on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest and other sites can easily block other users. LinkedIn appears to be an outlier among other top social media sites. One may argue we can delete our profile or slightly change our name. I argue why should we have to sacrifice our networking opportunities for something that is neither our fault or something we are powerless against? Although I care about this issue for the good of all LinkedIn users, this issue is a personal one as well. I once was a victim of a sexual assult in the workplace. Being young, it was quite a traumatizing experience for me.  Because of this incident, I was forced to leave my position and I never looked back, hoping to leave it behind me for good. Unfortunately, the story was only just beginning. It was the start of a stalking -- something I could have never prepared myself for. E-mails, voicemails; some threatening, some flirty, day after day. I quickly found I could ignore emails, delete voicemails, block Facebook, use privacy settings on Twitter -- yet EVERYDAY I was being looked at on LinkedIn. It really started hitting close to home when he started researching my new connections to see where they where located; if they were in a different area in which I worked for him, he would e-mail me to see if I moved and what I was doing. Little things like that started getting me really scared. LinkedIn, please listen. I know I'm not the only one. There are millions of stories out there; I'm sure many worse than mine -- victims of domestic violence, for example. If it's happening to me, it could happen to anybody. You could be losing many potential users because you don't have this feature. I've read users' comments saying when another social network similiar to LinkedIn becomes available, they would switch simply because of this blocking feature issue. Listen to your users. Listen to what they are saying. Listen to their stories. Take action. This feature can save lives. This feature will ease millions of fears. This feature will allow users to freely display information free of worry.

Anna R.
9,222 supporters
Petitioning California State Senate, California State House, Washington State Senate, Washington State House, Nevada State House, Nevada State Senate, Oregon State Senate, Oregon State House, Hawaii State Sena...

Call for Blue States to Move On

What happened to make this country the focus of judgment, laughter, and fear from the rest of the world? The industrialized world outside of the United States enjoys a better quality of life and general happiness that most of us can only imagine. First class education, comprehensive health care, clean food/water/air and an overall better relationship with their fellow citizens. And as a country, we have higher mortality rates at younger ages, poorer health, and an impoverished population who can't learn new skills without going deeper into debt. As much as we like to blame Donald Trump for our national problems; these problems were here before him, and they will still be here if Trump is removed from office tomorrow.  We have a political system that centralizes power to a consolidated political center in Washington, DC and an economic center in New York City. Our Electoral System will isolate the power to determine the direction of our political system to a very small, easily manipulated portion of the electorate in a strategic location.Worst of all, we have a large portion of the population who will empower a mentally unstable man to the highest office in the world; just so they can say “We Won”. This group is constantly complaining about a simply lost world with plentiful jobs in their communities. And now, they have the nerve to complain about losing the federal government programs they benefited from and voted against.It's time we said “ENOUGH” and have Progressive States and Communities band together and share resources and ideas to provide a better quality of life for its people, that the Trump Administration wants to take away. And furthermore, we need to ensure that we only support States and Communities who will change their policies for its people. We can no longer provide assistance to the Red States, just so they can abuse and neglect their citizens for business interests.   For the future of this nation, we need to explore every legal method possible to protect the people from an extremely dangerous President Trump.   A Values-Based Alliance of the States (VBAS) is one way of resisting this new reality of government, and the dangerous changes that we all know are inevitable. I understand that the constitution will not allow us to directly stop this monstrosity, but it will allow us to devalue it. A VBAS of certain states with similar values and policy preferences can and will use its population centers and economic influence to co-op, share resources, and implement policies with other co-opted states, while not having to depend on or engage the federal government. Examples: There are certain states with a majority of people that believe single-payer healthcare system (CA, MA, VT, NY, WA, OR, IL, HI.). If those states passed laws to provide single payer health care for its people, a Single Payer Healthcare VBAS organization of those states can share resources to improve efficiencies, expand medical training/education amongst the co-opted states, negotiate pharmaceutical/treatment, amend needed tax policies and petition the US Government. This would also force neighboring states to decide if they want to change their internal policies to provide single payer, so they can join the Health Care VBAS. A resident of Indiana might ask his state to join the VBAS because he could literally see his next-door neighbor in Illinois fully covered, and using a Doctor that just came back from his training at a medical school in California.Although the VBAS states cannot legally sign the Paris accords, they can change their internal policies to abide by its recommendations. There could be an environmental protection VBAS, where the states involved agree to abide by the Paris accords, improve safety protocols within its states, take climate change seriously, and provide economic preference to states and nations that do the same. CA, OR, NY, MA, VT, WA HI, and NV could agree to be a preferred customer of states or nations that voluntarily reduce its carbon emissions and address climate change, instead of LA or TX, which most likely will not.Other issues could include minimum wage, education, trade agreements, gun control and virtually every policy not adjudicated solely by the federal government.As more VBASes are organized and more states agree to join them, Donald Trump and the ignorance of future presidents become less and less relevant. Please sign this petition and pass it on to as many people as possible.

Blake Green
5,421 supporters
Petitioning Jerry Brown, Dianne Feinstein, California State Senate, California State House, Nancy Pelosi, Kevin McCarthy, Hillary Clinton, Doug LaMalfa, Connie Leyva, Donald Wagner, Donald Trump, President Don...

Unhomeless the Homeless in California

Declare Homelessness State of Emergency in California L.A. County Homeless On any given night, there are over 148,000 homeless people in California - 23% of the entire nation’s homeless population.  Los Angeles County has the second largest population of homeless people of any region in the United States, according to a government report released Wednesday. In Los Angeles, 600,000 people are considered "severely rent burdened," which means they spend half their income on rent. More than 8,000 people became homeless here for the first time last year, according to the 2017 Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority report. "We are reaching levels of inequality that we have not seen since the Gilded Age," said Tracy Rosenthal of the Los Angeles Tenants Union. The union helps organize tenant boycotts against things like rent increases and gentrification. Los Angeles County's total — 55,188 — was behind only New York City's 76,501, according to the 2017 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. However, 95 percent of people experiencing homelessness in New York City were sheltered, the report found, while only 25 percent of those experiencing homelessness in Los Angeles were sheltered in 2017. The HUD report findings were similar to the results of the 2017 Greater Los Angeles Homeless Count released in June by the Los Angeles Homeless Services Authority, which put the county's homeless total at 57,794 — an increase of 23 percent over the previous count. The HUD report found that on one night in January, nearly one of every four people experiencing homelessness in the United States was in New York City or Los Angeles. According to the report, overall homelessness increased nationwide this year for the first time in seven years, by slightly under 1 percent compared to 2016. On a given night across the country, 553,742 people were homeless, with nearly two-thirds housed in shelters or transitional housing programs and one- third living on the streets, according to the report L.A.'s big increase in homelessness had a significant impact on the national numbers. Between 2016 and 2017, individual homelessness increased by 9 percent (15,540 people) in the nation's major cities. Los Angeles accounted for 60 percent of this increase. According to the report, Los Angeles County ranked: - second nationally in the percent of unsheltered homeless, at 84.3 percent; - first in the number of individuals who are homeless, at 47,082; - first in the number of unaccompanied homeless youth at 5,163; and first in the number of homeless veterans (4,476) and percentage of unsheltered veterans (76.1 percent). California had 134,278 homeless people, and while the Golden State has the nation's largest population, the rate of 34 homeless residents per 10,000 people was twice the national average, according to the report. Of those, 68 percent were living on the streets, by far the worst percentage. The report said half the nation's homeless live in California, New York, Florida, Texas or Washington. Counties across the state are facing a pervasive and deepening homeless crisis that imminently endangers the health and safety of tens of thousands of residents, including veterans, women, children, LGBT, youth, persons with disabilities and seniors.  Nowhere is this more evident than in Los Angeles County at least  134,278 men, women and children -- 10,000 to 12,000 in Downtown, including more than 8,000 parents and children in the San Fernando Valley alone -- are without homes. There are beds for less than one third of the homeless in Los Angeles county, comprehensive services are available to far fewer than half, and the county jails are routinely used as a substitution for mental health facilities.  In Los Angeles county the tremendous scale of homelessness threatens the economic stability of the entire region by burdening emergency medical services and the social services infrastructure. It is time to treat this crisis like the emergency it truly is.  The increasing numbers of displaced homeless people and the lack of ongoing resources to stably re-house them require immediate and extraordinary action. That is why We in LA County are taking the lead in a statewide effort to ask Governor Brown to declare a state of emergency in California to address this growing humanitarian crisis. Please join us! Sign our petition urging to declare the homeless crisis a state of emergency and bring the concerted effort and resources needed to tackle this crisis in a meaningful way.  Homelessness, Humanitarianism, Social justice, Human Rights, Economic Justice, Homeless crisis, Affordable housing, Civil Rights, Civil Liberties, and the Right to Live Free of prejudice. No human in our country should be homeless. Let's take the first step together. Everyone deserves a safe place to call home.  Then Share this petition with your friends on social media to spread the word even further. Thank you for your support.

Lori Jean Siebers
3,745 supporters
Petitioning Facebook, Facebook, Google, Twitter, LinkedIn

MediSure - Treatment For All

Among five basic needs that include food, cloth, shelter, education, and health, health is a very crucial issue. In most of the developing countries like ours rural people are often deprived of proper medical facilities due to a high cost of treatment and sometimes due to low per capita income. For that reason, they cannot get the proper medical treatment or cannot bear the high cost of medicine. In a recent survey, it has seen that around 30 % of dying patient is unable to receive service of a trained physician and around 60% of the expected mother of a rural area cannot get the prenatal checkup. It has also been seen that government facilitates a single hospital of 50 beds for a Thana/Upazila areas for 2 lakh people on average. Government reserve for this sector is only 2-3 lakh taka which is very poor. If we calculate it for per capita, government facilitate 1.00-1.50 taka only for a person in a year. As soon as we identified this burning issue, we got determined to turn this into an opportunity for developing a successful Social Business in order to contribute towards our society. Our plan is to provide medical facilities to the rural area but initially, we are going to provide the service in Thakurgaon region. Our service is all about providing medical treatment via mobile medical service.

Harunur Rashid
2,269 supporters
Petitioning Facebook, Twitter, Inc, LinkedIn


MOCHA USON BLOG! Mocha expressed what entirely happening in the philippines right now, and anyone has the right to share their opinion and belief. Mocha never violate nor mislead the public in whatsoever blog she is putting on her account. Nevertheless I myself agree to that. You can check either my account as well that I'm not being biased to anyone who posted everyday on facebook like News majority not jumping to conclusion and watch it on my own and so some of my own research. Let's just be fair... All of us has the right to expression our own opinion in the world and no one have the right to demand to suspend nor block someone blog because it says the truth and nothing but the truth. Mr. Paul Quilet requested to suspend Ms. Mocha blog due to what reason because she is telling the whole truth only and Mr. Paul is the opposite of it and we all Filipino people know what your group are up to right now that's why you want us to be quite. I think it's way of your coward towards the issue now in our society. I never see any report of Mocha which she is being biased to the Philippine Administration or to anyone.  I myself can prove that. I'm only into silent type of Pres. Duterte supporters, and i must say now is the right time for me to express myself as well if my fellow Filipino citizens is threatening one of my fellow citizen also because she/he is telling the truth. According to Martin Luther king Jr. "I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality... I believe that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word. "  Mr. Quilet raise a petition and I'm raising this to object on that petition.  KEEP MOCHA BLOG ACTIVE....    

Jhonny Cylsse Arol
1,543 supporters
Petitioning LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter


Los profesores de economía queremos eliminar de la mente de toda la sociedad el concepto de que nuestra asignatura es una asignatura que incentiva al capitalismo  y a tener cualquier vinculación política. La modalidad de economía enseña, entre otros, a sus alumnos a pensar, a ser críticos, a tomar decisiones racionales. Incentiva la responsabilidad social, la inserción laboral y ayuda a conocer colectivos en peligro de exclusión social, el respeto al medio ambiente. Forma en la importancia del sector público para mantener el bienestar social que tenemos en nuestro país. Promociona la solidaridad, la empatía, el saber hacer. Por lo tanto es necesario denunciar a aquellos colectivos que nos tachan de pertenecer a un grupo de actores que no actúan en nuestro escenario. Nos interesa una sociedad libre, informada, crítica, que sepa tomar decisiones. Luchamos por cambiar el YO por el NOSOTROS.

815 supporters
Petitioning Google Inc., Apple, Samsung, Microsoft, Twitter, Inc, LinkedIn, Justin Trudeau, Angela Merkel (CDU), Matteo Renzi, Shinzō Abe, Theresa May MP, Emmanuel Macron, nguyen xuan phuc, Donald Trump

Protect online freedom in Vietnam

(Vietnamese text at the bottom) There has never been a worse time to be an online blogger in Vietnam.   On June 12, 2018, the Vietnamese National Assembly approved a controversial cyber security law that would require giant tech companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter, LinkedIn, Apple and Samsung to share the personal data of users in Vietnam.   The Vietnamese Communist Party’s harsher restrictions on online dissent would require social media and tech companies in Vietnam to remove any anti-state content from their platforms.  The new cyber security law is a serious violation of international legal standards.  This measure would be used only to further legalize the ongoing crackdown on peaceful online dissent, bloggers and activists like Nguyen Trung Ton, Truong Minh Duc, Pham Van Troi, Nguyen Bac Truyen, Hoang Duc Binh, Tran Hoang Phuc, Nguyen Ngoc Nhu Quynh (also known as Mother Mushroom), Tran Thi Nga, Bui Van Trung and Ho Van Hai.  Violent protests were held in some parts of the country against the content control measure that would restrict the online freedom and right to privacy of the 53% and rising share of Vietnam’s population of 90 million who have access to the Internet.   There is now no safe place left in Vietnam for people to speak freely.  That is why giant tech companies have a social responsibility to withdraw their services if Vietnam fails to revoke its controversial cyber security law before it takes effect in 2019.  Member countries of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) must confront Vietnam when it defies international trade and cooperation standards and, ultimately, the Internet itself.  Sign this petition to protect online freedom and freedom of speech in Vietnam.  More information:  Nguyen Dieu Tu Uyen and John Boudreau, “Vietnam parliament passes cyber law denounced in street protests,” The Sydney Morning Herald, June 13, 2018.  Prashanth Parameswaran, “What’s Next For Vietnam’s New Cyber Law?” The Diplomat, June 12, 2018.  Mai Nguyen, “Vietnam lawmakers approve cyber law, tighten rules on Google, Facebook,” Reuters, June 12, 2018.  “Vietnam Parliament passes cyber law denounced in street protests,” Bloomberg, June 12, 2018.  Human Rights Watch, “Vietnam: Withdraw Problematic Cyber Security Law,” June 7, 2018.  Amnesty International, “Viet Nam: New Cybersecurity law a devastating blow for freedom of expression,” June 12, 2018.  “Statement from the U.S. Embassy [and Canada] on the Draft Cybersecurity Law.”   ___________________________________________________________________ Thư Thỉnh Cầu KHÔNG ĐÁP ỨNG Luật An Ninh Mạng Việt Nam Kính gởi quí vị Giám Đốc Điều Hành: Google, Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Apple, and Microsoft Kính thưa quí vị, Chưa bao giờ những nhà báo mạng ở Việt Nam trải qua thời gian bi thảm như thế. Ngày 12 tháng 6 năm 2018, Quốc Hội Việt Nam thông qua Luật An Ninh Mạng đầy tranh cải, luật đòi hỏi những công ty kỹ thuật cung cấp thông tin của người sử dụng internet tại Việt Nam. Đảng Cộng Sản Việt Nam tỏ ra cứng rắn hơn với những nhà bất đồng chinh kiến trên mạng.  Họ đòi hỏi những trang mạng xã hội gỡ bỏ những nội dung chống chánh quyền trong vòng một ngày sau khi nhận yên cầu từ chánh quyền. Luật An Ninh Mạng vi phạm nghiêm trọng căn bản luật pháp quốc tế, đồng thời cho phép nhà cầm quyền được tùy tiện xác định những ý kiến nào là phạm luật phải gỡ bỏ. Biện pháp nầy có thể dùng để hợp pháp hoá những hành vi đàn áp những cư dân mạng ôn hoà và những người bất đồng chính kiến như Nguyễn Trung Tôn, Trương Minh Đức, Phạm Văn Trội, Nguyễn Bắc Truyển, Hoàng Đức Bình, Trần Hoàng Phúc, Nguyễn Ngọc Như Quỳnh ( Mẹ Nấm), Trần Thị Nga, Bùi Văn Trung, Hồ Văn Hải. Đã nổ ra những cuộc phản kháng ở nhiều nơi trên toàn quốc chống lại cuộc bỏ phiếu cho dự luật kìm chế tự do thông tin mạng và vi phạm quyền riêng tư cá nhân của 53% trong hơn 90 triệu người dân đang xữ dụng Internet ở Việt Nam. Việt Nam không phải nơi an toàn cho người dân được tự do phát biểu.  Vì vậy những đại công ty kỹ thuật phải có trách nhiệm xã hội là phải ngưng cung cấp dịch vụ Internet nếu Việt Nam không chịu hủy bỏ Luật An Ninh Mạng, sẽ có hiệu lực kể từ ngày 1 tháng Giêng năm 2019. Những quốc gia thuộc nhóm Đối Tác Toàn Diện và Tiến Bộ Xuyên Thái Bình Dương (CPTPP) phải đương đầu với Việt Nam khi họ thách thức thế giới về thương mại, những tiêu chuẩn hợp tác và sau cùng là vấn đề Internet. Xin ký tên vào thơ Thỉnh Nguyện nầy để bảo vệ quyền tự do Internet và tự do ngôn luận. Liên Minh Dân Chủ Việt Nam  

Alliance for Democracy in Vietnam
584 supporters
Petitioning LinkedIn

LinkedIn must close fake accounts, stop anonymous browsing, prevent harassment and enforce strict penalties on violations.

If LinkedIn acts to form reasonable protections for its members they will increase member's safety worldwide.  Is this issue important to LinkedIn? With so many loopholes that enable predators and make victims more vulnerable the answer appears to be no.  The consequences of fake accounts harm LinkedIn and its members.  LinkedIn's solution was to allow members to block up to 50 accounts.  This has not abated problems. LinkedIn can not prevent every single fake account from being formed on its platform but it must do much more. LinkedIn must end anonymous browsing in its current form and allow members choices, like the option, "Block all anonymous browsing."  For example a premium subscription add on that allows members the freedom to select what type of searches can be performed on their profiles would dramatically help members who are victims of stalkers.  The add on premium blocking selections could vary from anyone searching your profile, to only your network, to verified recruiters, to no one private or semi-private.  A new premium tool, even if it is fee based, would be a good faith effort to make a reasonable solution to a growing problem. The blocking add on would likely result in curtailing fraud, impersonation and stalking.  Moreover this could be measured and quantifiable through the year over year data of recorded complaints for trolling and stalking.    LinkedIn's success is actually part of the problem. With incredible growth comes higher levels of danger.  When this petition was first created LinkedIn was 259+ million member platform, it is now a 414+ million member platform.  The number 1 non-violent crime is identity theft.  414 million is a treasure trove of temptations for criminals.  This petition is not seeking the elimination of every single fake account.  Nevertheless LinkedIn is not aggressive enough in deterring fake accounts, and finding existing ones to shut down.  LinkedIn needs to do much more to locate and eliminate existing fake accounts thus stopping a means for a predator to use LinkedIn for nefarious purposes.  LinkedIn must allow members the choice to block searches of their profiles from private (anonymous) and semi-private viewing.  Members have the ability to make their own profile private however a fake account need only to be a 2nd connection and will still be able to view your profile regardless if it is private or public.  Let's remember if you need to make your profile private it means you are letting the stalker win as those looking to potentially hire you may not find your profile.   See the link to the article below about a NJ woman who made a fake Facebook profile.  That the act alone could be illegal as a form of impersonation. Fake accounts have gotten out of hand.  LinkedIn filed suit against 1000's of fake accounts in an effort to attain the fake account holder’s true identity. LinkedIn’s policies towards stopping fake accounts are not strong enough nor proactive enough or they would not have filed a lawsuit complaining about 1000’s of fake accounts created by bots on their own platform.  The suit stand as an admission of LinkedIn’s failure with our safety as 1000's of fake accounts should have been prevented from being created.  A blocking feature of anonymous (private) profile searches would act as a deterrent to stalking, trolling and fake accounts. There is a need a for LinkedIn to at least offer this feature and allow members the right to choose.  Don't you deserve the right to choose?  Apple has made a stance for individual's privacy why can't LinkedIn stand for our right to choose?  Nearly all other social media platforms offer expanded blocking.  Why is it that LinkedIn does not care about such an important issue? In the suit LinkedIn filed it indicated that it was harmed by fake accounts through the act of trespass (on page 15 of the complaint, Count 5, Case No. CV 14-0068 filed in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (San Francisco)).  If this allegation is true every member that had a fake or anonymous account view their profile has been trespassed against. LinkedIn claims in their complaint that through these trespasses it has suffered irreparable harm.  That sounds very serious. If this is true then the same has occurred for millions of other LinkedIn members on its platform.   Even if the new blocking feature was a paid option, how can LinkedIn deny the blocking of anonymous viewing?  Can LI demonstrate that there has never been an instance when anonymous viewing caused harm to a member?  Never!  LI's market cap is $15 billion with around $3 billion in cash on hand.  LI should have dedicated teams working around the clock to shut down fake accounts and stalking issues. The cost benefit analysis is clear, investing in the protection of its members and platform vs doing nothing and witness the erosion of member's trust and the loss of LI's platform integrity. Can LI afford to lose your trust?  LI's most valuable asset is its platform.  Why doesn't LI identify the number of fake accounts it closes.   The explosion of fake accounts on the LI platform demonstrates a lack of due diligence in the verification process when a LinkedIn account is created.  All new accounts should require a verified email, phone number and credit card even for a free account.  If no credit card exist a viable secondary option should be available like providing a driver's license number or refundable PayPal account payment of $1. We can all do something about fake accounts today!  If you see an account that is fake you have the ability to report it on LinkedIn.  LinkedIn will close accounts from these reports. LinkedIn must take massive action now.  Many individuals enjoy LinkedIn and find it helpful in their lives and have landed amazing jobs using LI.  It has value that transcends the power of the resume and is what makes LI a great tool. At the same time a dark cloud is hovering over the platform through a rising number of bad apples trolling LI. Bolstered detection systems, to deter, prevent and eliminate fake accounts must be implemented. Is it fair for that the majority of fake account closings to come from member's complaints?  Is it fair that members do more to locate and alert LinkedIn of active fake accounts then LinkedIn does on its own? LI should create a Committee of experienced LI members solely to make suggestions and report on safety solutions that could enhance and protect its member's experience.  LinkedIn has a great product unlike anything else out there.  Fake accounts and anonymous browsing are on the rise and stand to stifle LI's growth and progress. It's time we all take back control of our LI profile and platform, please sign and share the petition on all your social media feed.  Please let as many people as possible know of the changes we are trying to bring about.  Together we can make a difference and change things for the better!!!  Carpe Diem

Coalition Against Fake Accounts and Anonymous Searching (CAFAAS)
544 supporters
Petitioning Facebook, Twitter, Enrique Peña Nieto, Gobierno del DF, Grupo Salinas, United Nations,, The Walt Disney Company, Gobierno de la Ciudad de México, Mark Zuckerberg, Google, Inc, Google, Ha...

Bebé de 1 año Ariel Segundo Barrios sufrió accidente automovilístico en Jocotitlan Edo Mex

El sábado 16/09/2017 el pequeño Ariel Segundo Barrios edad un añosufrió un accidente automovilístico en compañía de su familia. Lo que le ocasionó severas lesiones como: politraumatismo y hematomas, edema cerebral severo, infarto frontal bilateral, fractura FPT derecha, fractura orbitaria bilateral de cráneo, lesión de ojo derecho; por lo cual se encuentra en terapia intensiva orointubado y con vigilancia las 24 horas. Se encuentra en el Hospital Centro Médico de Toluca (Metepec) con una deuda que asciende hasta el momento a la cantidad de: $560,924,12 La familia del bebé Ariel es de escasos recursos y carece de recursos económicos para pagar la cuenta de los servicios médicos.

Luis Felipe Lopez
281 supporters
Petitioning Facebook, Twitter, narindar , Indiana Governor, India,, Support Admin, LinkedIn

Assistant Professors against the injustice in the 7th Pay scale.

Assistant Professors of Universities and Degree Colleges take the maximum work load and produce maximum contribution to academic field in terms of teaching, administration, research, student interaction, data collection etc. Besides, the ground reality is, Assistant Professors do the maximum academic and administrative work of their Professors also. Yet Assistant Professors are the least paid in the salary band. The salary difference between Professors and Assistant Professors is around 1 lakh Rs. We want to protest this gross injustice and seek to reduce this salary gap in the interest of academic work culture. The UGC had promised to reduce the gap, but the reality is the gap has actually increased in 7thPay by many times.  

Brij Bhushan
248 supporters
LinkedIn: Protect your users from stalkers and help keep victims safe

Hi everyone, my name is Paul Rockwell, and I head up Trust & Safety at LinkedIn. We know members have requested a blocking feature on LinkedIn. I come to you today to assure you that your concerns were heard loud and clear. We built this feature not only because it was a feature our members requested, but because we also knew it was the right thing to do. I’m pleased to share that we are rolling out a new Member Blocking feature today to all LinkedIn members. While on the surface this may seem like a simple feature to develop, it was not. There were many different use cases to consider, products and features to integrate, as well as a user interface we had to create. In addition to Member Blocking, there are also a number of other LinkedIn settings that you may want to consider such as: • Disconnecting - This provides you with the ability to remove any existing connection to another member in your network. • Customize Your Public Profile - This provides you with control over the profile content that's discoverable by search engines. • Activity Broadcasts - This provides you with control whether others can see updates to your profile, recommendations made and companies followed. • Photo Visibility - This provides you with control over who can see your profile photo. • Profile Viewing – This alters what others see when you visit their profile. Before you decide to block another member, we recommend you enable anonymous profile viewing (the last bullet listed above). For an overview of our new Member Blocking feature, which includes a link to the instructions on how to block, visit our Safety Center here: We remain committed to providing our members with a safe experience, and welcome any feedback you would like to share with us. Thanks again, Paul

4 years ago