How GTM Teams Can Prevent LinkedIn Account Bans and Terms of Service Violations at Scale

Ryan M. · 2026-02-10T23:20:24.869Z

At scale, how do GTM teams prevent their linkedin account from getting banned / violating the terms of service. Obviously we all want to take advantage of tools to extract some insights/automate within linkedin, but it appears super tricky to do without violating their terms of service. I have connected my linkedin to clay for pulling some contacts for engagement on company posts, and have tried some tools like the phantombuster / heyreach's of the world (but have disabled them), and am doing my outreach on linkedin manually. But just got a 3 day block on my linkedin account and want to avoid that in the future. Any advice?

How GTM Teams Can Prevent LinkedIn Account Bans and Terms of Service Violations at Scale | RevGenius

7 comments

· Sorted by Oldest

Zack D.
·
·
Use spintax for your copy. Don’t send more than 30 Connection Requests or 30 DMs per day (per LinkedIn sending account).
🙌1
Vincent
·
·
Indeed Ryan M. the biggest mistake is to become greedy and to want to do too much too quickly through one profile. Respect the daily limits and if really scallling this is important to your business you can check providers such as mirror profiles or salesfoge to scale LinkedIn outreach.
Ryan M.
·
·
This is super helpful, thanks guys! I thought I was being mindful of the limits, but I will be more careful and look at some of those tools! LinkedIn is definitely key to our engagement strategy
Anne Z.
·
·
Sorry to hear that you got banned. At scale, the biggest mistake I see is stacking tools that weren’t designed to work safely together. LinkedIn flags behavior patterns, so the safest approach is: • Stay within platform limits • Avoid any type of browser automations that simulate aggressive activity • Use tools that are explicitly built to adhere to LinkedIn’s behavioral limits and do not bypass them • Centralize outreach in one structured system instead of running multiple automations in parallel Most bans happen when behavior spikes look unnatural, even if the intent wasn’t bad...
1
Hussain M.
·
·
Got blocked doing the same thing last year with Phantombuster. What worked for me: I just connect manually now but track who views my profile or likes posts first, then I message them. LinkedIn doesn't flag it because you're responding to engagement they started. Slower but way safer.
1
Paul B.
·
·
Ryan M. There is push back from the platform too. I just saw this in Apollo: Note: Effective January 30, 2026, Apollo introduced a compliance-driven change to LinkedIn tasks. Automated LinkedIn actions, including connection requests, messages, and profile or post views, are no longer supported, and the Execute button has been removed for LinkedIn tasks. You can still create and track LinkedIn tasks in Apollo, but actions must now be completed manually in LinkedIn and then marked complete in Apollo. My guess is, we'll start to see a lot more people in your boat, in the short run. And in the medium-long run, we'll get new tools coming on the scene, spawning a cottage industry of solutions to mask spamming activity as legitimate. Around and around we go ⛱️
Ryan M.
·
·
This is really insightful - thanks everyone

Zack D.
·
·
Use spintax for your copy. Don’t send more than 30 Connection Requests or 30 DMs per day (per LinkedIn sending account).
🙌1
Vincent
·
·
Indeed Ryan M. the biggest mistake is to become greedy and to want to do too much too quickly through one profile. Respect the daily limits and if really scallling this is important to your business you can check providers such as mirror profiles or salesfoge to scale LinkedIn outreach.
Ryan M.
·
·
This is super helpful, thanks guys! I thought I was being mindful of the limits, but I will be more careful and look at some of those tools! LinkedIn is definitely key to our engagement strategy
Anne Z.
·
·
Sorry to hear that you got banned. At scale, the biggest mistake I see is stacking tools that weren’t designed to work safely together. LinkedIn flags behavior patterns, so the safest approach is: • Stay within platform limits • Avoid any type of browser automations that simulate aggressive activity • Use tools that are explicitly built to adhere to LinkedIn’s behavioral limits and do not bypass them • Centralize outreach in one structured system instead of running multiple automations in parallel Most bans happen when behavior spikes look unnatural, even if the intent wasn’t bad...
1
Hussain M.
·
·
Got blocked doing the same thing last year with Phantombuster. What worked for me: I just connect manually now but track who views my profile or likes posts first, then I message them. LinkedIn doesn't flag it because you're responding to engagement they started. Slower but way safer.
1
Paul B.
·
·
Ryan M. There is push back from the platform too. I just saw this in Apollo: Note: Effective January 30, 2026, Apollo introduced a compliance-driven change to LinkedIn tasks. Automated LinkedIn actions, including connection requests, messages, and profile or post views, are no longer supported, and the Execute button has been removed for LinkedIn tasks. You can still create and track LinkedIn tasks in Apollo, but actions must now be completed manually in LinkedIn and then marked complete in Apollo. My guess is, we'll start to see a lot more people in your boat, in the short run. And in the medium-long run, we'll get new tools coming on the scene, spawning a cottage industry of solutions to mask spamming activity as legitimate. Around and around we go ⛱️
Ryan M.
·
·
This is really insightful - thanks everyone