# Edit a LinkedIn post to the length its message needs

Original constructed teaching cases. No real accounts, readers or customers.

## Case 1

K1 — Constructed numeric cut. Source: “100 reactions plus comments / 2,000 impressions gives 5%. No claim about distinct people.” Weak revision: “5% of people responded.” Decision: retain the full event-ratio sentence and the distinct-person qualification; remove the repeated celebratory opening instead. Outcome: the shorter wording explains the same supported unit. The local finder can expose a removed statement, but cannot decide which interpretation is true.

## Case 2

K2 — Constructed event cut. Source: “Register by 6 November 2026 at 17:00 Europe/Berlin; places are not confirmed until accepted.” Weak revision: “Register by Friday evening.” Decision: “Register by 6 November 2026, 17:00 Europe/Berlin. Confirmation follows acceptance.” Preserve the explicit year and registration condition. Outcome: less repetition with usable date/zone and a preserved acceptance boundary; no invitation was sent.

## Case 3

K3 — Constructed context trap. Source: “We changed the handoff template. We have not measured retention.” A revision keeps both sentences but adds “Proof that retention improved” as its headline. The literal checks can find every protected line. Decision: replace the unsupported headline with “A clearer handoff template; retention unmeasured.” Outcome: meaning reviewed beyond a green-looking literal match, without inventing a customer effect.