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: Any situation, any time; this person has always something negative to say about it. It should be a noun or an adjective to describe a person who is a damp cloud walking over every sunshine situations at the cubicle, hoping to drench other people with his miserable comments. I considered "sourpuss" but would prefer something more important sounding, like "misogynist." 
Answer: My favorite of all time comes from a Saturday Night Live character: Debbie Downer. Ever since, when someone's hellbent on constantly reporting about the sucky side of everything, you will often hear someone say to them, "Quit being such a Debbie Downer.".
[EX A]: no

[EX Q]: Question: Whenever I hear statements like "It was a great deal for he and I" and "Call Karen and I in the morning," I die a little. Such solecisms, as Twain said in another context (Cooper's prose style), "grate upon the fastidious ear." Moreover, I know that these things will likely become accepted usage in time, if that hasn't already happened. As someone who tries to be careful with words and speech, I feel almost a moral obligation to hold the line against this kind of decline. I'm not a word snob; I say "ain't" when it works for emphasis, and so on. I've tried suggesting the grammatical alternative to the above constructions, but even when I phrase my suggestion in the gentlest possible way it never works well and I almost always wind up feeling pedantic and priggish at best, and at worst I feel I've alienated someone. What's the general opinion here? Is it best to just let these things slide or to take up the fight? In sum, is there a good way to promote good grammar, or at least protect it from the most egregious violations? 
Answer: Does the grammatical faux pas compromise or endanger the communication, or is it merely annoying? (Annoying to you personally, of course. The speaker, and no doubt many others are perfectly happy with it.) Language can be a delight, but it is also, and to many, merely a means to an end. If you are with friends who enjoy language for its own sake and who want to improve their understanding and usage of it, a courteous and appropriate correction will be appreciated. If you are with strangers or persons with whom you have only a business relationship, then as long as the communication is not jeopardized you're probably best advised to bite your tongue and realize that you are a member of a small minority. Unless, of course, you really do wish to be viewed as a snob.
[EX A]: no

[EX Q]: Question: If there are an odd number of competitors at any stage of a single-elimination tournament, one player is excused from play and continues on as if he had defeated his (nonexistent) opponent. This is called "getting a by". Or "getting a bye". Who knows, maybe it's even "getting a buy", although I doubt it. My dictionary lists by as meaning "pass" in card-games, so that suggests that spelling. On the other hand, the image of the referee looking from the single player, to the empty and undefended far side of the field, and then back to the player, shrugging, and saying "Bye", is too strong to easily discard. Like other parts of the anatomy, everyone's got an opinion. I'm looking for a cite. 
Answer: According to the OED, bye is correct word. b. The position of an individual, who, in consequence of the numbers being odd, is left without a competitor after the rest have been drawn in pairs. (OED also points out a few other uses of bye in sports, but with different meanings.) And while it specifically doesn't clarify whether the competitor advances, the American Heritage Dictionary does point that out. The position of one who draws no opponent for a round in a tournament and so advances to the next round.
[EX A]:
no