Is there any context in which hateful and/or abusive tweets about the McCanns are acceptable?

[jassi]

Are you saying you are not offended by racist, anti-semitic and homophobic remarks?  Does that mean you find them acceptable?

Neither, I just let them float by.

[Erngath]

LOL, I made that one up.  It's rather nice I think.

Sorry I thought I had clicked on the laughing emoji.
That could be the top name for a girl next year.
Assuming you were intending it as a suggestion for a girl..

Absolutely true story.
Neighbours of someone I know called their little boy a name they had heard in a Disney film.
Not unusual nowadays you might think
But this was Cinderella.
The character as the cat.
The name was LUCIFER.

[Sunny]

the Moderator in his infinite wisdom deleted my reply to this.  OK, it was somewhat facetious I admit but I was trying to make a serious point.  Is there now a forum requirement to back up every statement with percentages and statistics when making a broad generalisation on the course of a discussion.  For example, if I say "many people keep pets", is this to be questioned?  Do I instead have to say "Current statistics on pet ownership show that as many as 72% of households keep a pet, of which 23% have fish, 42% have cats and 51% have dogs?"

I saw your original post Vertigo Swirl and to be honest my post itself was not intended to be taken seriously in relation to requesting a percentage either. So we are all square on that one.

[Sunny]

Whataboutery.  Start a new thread about Amaral and his fans and the abuse they have suffered over the years.  This one is about the McCanns and the context in which abusive and hateful tweets are acceptable.

Perhaps I will. I have seen some nasty comments on twitter and elsewhere. Whether they are still there now though I cannot be sure.

For some reason this case appears to attract the worst of humanity on both sides, obviously not everyone of course and present company excepted 

[Alice Purjorick]

I clearly have been paying attention as my post shows... You are making a generalisation of evidence and applying your generalisation  to a specific case... What we, have here is a lack of forensic evidence.... Amarals, case, is, built on a lack of evidence... Rather than evidence itself... All my considered opinion

You seem to be shape shifting.

[Robittybob1]

Probably both are hearsay.

Hearsay and the confusion that causes!