Thanks for the overshare unskinnybob
Seriously though I think your response is great as it clearly illustrates that the product is not overly limited and certainly allows the user to go a little wild (or is that Girls Gone Wild in your case?).
Drukkie made a comment further up suggesting that instead of imposing a throttle we simply cut the account, but I really want to stress that this really isn't the case.
Our Acceptable Usage Policy has been discussed here many times and what we do is to examine user behavior patterns based on a number of criteria, including potential shaping bypasses and extended periods of continuous high speed downloading.
On those criteria we generally end up with a very small list of users who need to be issued a warning. If after issuing the warning we do not receive acknowledgement and there is no significant change in the users pattern of behavior we issue further warnings and ultimately if we have to issue a 3rd warning the customer is advised to move to a more appropriate product or have the account terminated.
The final tally of accounts that we end up terminating on this basis is a very very short list and if we were in fact employing this purely as a mechanism to reduce network costs as an alternative to throttling it would not really be working very well
The bottom line is that as much as we may hate them rules are rules and however lenient and forgiving your rule set may be at some point you still have to have a mechanism in place to enforce them and ensure that there is a degree of accountability for not following them.