Given the Question and Answer pair, detect whether the answer is acceptable or not. Denote acceptable answer as "yes", otherwise denote as "no". An acceptable answer is consistent with the context in question, detailed, long, and uses general knowledge of English. Answers that are not definite and suggest a variety of options are not acceptable answers.

[EX Q]: Question: I need a single-word to describe something good that (unexpectedly) resulted from something bad. This good thing could not have occurred without the bad event happening first, as a precursor. Example sentence: "I got in a horrible car accident and broke my leg, but falling in love with my nurse at the hospital was the ____," (something like that). 
Answer: The word irony has undergone a bit of a semantic shift and is often used for a perceived contradiction, among others a contradiction between one's expectations and an actual fact or event. Merriam-Webster gives as one of its meanings incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result and continues with examples in which the outcome is worse than expected; but it can be used for better outcomes as well, like in your case: "Falling in love with the nurse was the irony of my accident." Or "ironically, getting fired was the best thing that had happened to me in a long time".
[EX A]: no

[EX Q]: Question: Does "egoistic" and "egotistic" mean the same thing? 
Answer: No. While similar, they have some important differences. Consider this note on usage from the Oxford Dictionaries: The words egoism and egotism are frequently confused, as though interchangeable, but there are distinctions worth noting. Both words derive from Latin ego ('I'), the first-person singular pronoun. Egotism, the more commonly used term , denotes an excessive sense of self-importance, too-frequent use of the word 'I,' and general arrogance and boastfulness. Egoism, a more subtle term , is perhaps best left to ethicists, for whom it denotes a view or theory of moral behavior in which self-interest is the root of moral conduct. An egoist, then , might devote considerable attention to introspection, but could be modest about it, whereas an egotist would have an exaggerated sense of the importance of his or her self-analysis, and would have to tell everyone.
[EX A]: yes

[EX Q]: Question: How can you explain that this double negation is not a double negation? Is there a rule in English about this kind of sentence? PS / Do I have to mention Pink Floyd Copyright ? :-) Edit : Since there are a lot of Pink Floyd related explanation, I'll bring a Freddy Mercury one : "I don't have time for no monkey business", which I also understand as "I don't have time for monkey business". Am I right ? 
Answer: You could assume that commas have been left out: "We do, not need, no education" in which case the implication would me that although education is needed, they do not 'do' it (incorrect, but could be appropriate as slang). Alternatively: "We do not [have], need no, education" Where the repition is used as emphasis: "we do not [have] education, and we need no education" Both of these are a bit of a stretch, and while possible, I doubt they are what Pink Floyd intended.
[EX A]:
no