munglespoon This is still not a reason to tell them to use email instead
The word I used was suggest. If a product doesn’t allow something, but there’s a way to do it that’s allowed, it’s surely better to help them do what they want to do by another means, rather than have a blanket “you must not…” without any explanation whatsoever.
munglespoon And I will go back to say that it is the same as telling them to write a letter instead of making a long phone call.
That would have been perfectly correct advice in 1956, when my mother had to do precisely that to to communicate with her eldest brother, who had emigrated to Australia before she was born. Travel was completely unaffordable by ordinary people. The phone box half a mile away always had a queue and only did local calls. She was never able to visit him and he was never able to return, so they never did meet in person. Letters took 6 weeks each way but was the only chance they had of “talking” to each other.
Things have changed rather a lot since then. giffgaff gives calls to Australia for 2p per minute. So, writing a letter isn’t a sensible alternative any more. But the advice to write a letter would have been perfectly sensible and accepted advice at the time, and nobody would have posted on the GPO forum of 1956 (joke alert) that phone boxes should give 12 minute calls to Australia for the same 4 (old) pence that local calls cost at the time.
munglespoon Tell them about the opportunity of other bulk SMS companies and maybe how the message they have sent is considered bulk, but do not tell them that email is the better way to communicate.
So, you’re claiming its acceptable to tell them about a competitor’s service, which they would have to pay maybe 3p for each recipient, but not acceptable to tell them about a service they can use to do what they want from goodybag data at no extra charge?