This has become a challenge for us not just in phone number, but emails as well. We may have constituents with no valid email or phone number while unified view requires that number sitll be primary. Our audit query in database view helps us catch these "Inactive but still Primary" cases, but we'll need this updated in unified view before database view goes away and we can't fix them anymore.

Yes, it makes zero sense when you have only inactive phone numbers that one of those inactive numbers has to be marked as "primary."

We may not know the primary but constituent has provided several.

May not be an active to mark as primary - why require it?

Constituents can have multiple phone they use and don't always have a primary.

I agree. Inactive, opt-outs, bounced emails, and deceased record phone number/emails should not have to be marked primary.

There are cases when there is only one phone number on the record, but it's been proven to be outdated, and no longer a means to contact them. Being forced to mark such a phone number (or email) as primary in these circumstances is not ideal.

We mark emails and phones as inactive when they are no longer in use. If they only have the one email, it results in them having an inactive email also marked as primary.

When a constituent is deceased, we do not want them to have a primary email or phone number. We would like the ability to remove the primary indicator from all contact types.