That sounds counterproductive towards creating the better world you are hoping to create. If you're going to use channels of communication that will be shut dow

That sounds counterproductive towards creating the better world you are hoping to create. If you're going to use channels of communication that will be shut down after only a few uses that are contrary to the recipients' interests, they should be saved for issues of real rather than symbolic substance. It does matter whether or not corporations let people easily delete their profiles and accounts, but that won't be solved by a small number of savvy people getting exceptions without actually convincing anyone that the greater principle is important. It will be solved either through regulations, or through convincing the vast majority of users that failing to fulfill this duty irrevocably damages that company's reputation. Regulators this year are just barely on the side of protecting consumers, and next year they will likely begin dismantling many of these requirements. When it comes to actual consumers, I bet barely 10% of people think it is important, and if they do they are convinced it is an inevitability, rather than the type of product defect that justifies them not using a service or product. In the case of Microsoft, becoming an absurd squeaky wheel seems like a personally risky thing to do. Certainly such messages could be interpreted as violating some portion of LinkedIn's professional community policies. The parent organization of LinkedIn, which is of course Microsoft, could decide when those policies need to be more strictly enforced.