Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

[Q]: CONTEXT: This irks me too, but I'm certain it's done to convey to the audience that the character is actually drinking. It's one of those tropes that people have become accustomed to, even though it isn't realistic. It's similar to the trope of "every time you turn on a microphone, it whines with feedback for a second, then settles down." Not realistic, but it clearly shows the audience what's going on.  <sep>  Q: Why does TV shows always make a full drink sound like an almost empty one? A: done to convey to the audience that the character is actually drinking  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Is it a good technique?
[A]: Yes


[Q]: CONTEXT: There were many contradictions in Prot's character -- on one hand, he had an astonishing knowledge of astronomy (some of the things he'd discovered were absolutely new to some famous astronomers); on the other hand, he was hospitalized in a mental institute due to the fact that he had many mental issues. The staff obviously concluded that they were dealing with a mentally insane genius. He was maybe quite a unique and non-standard patient, but regardless - he was a patient in a mental hospital. Some people took this pretty seriously, and investigated his story, but you must remember that the entire situation ended pretty quickly -- throughout the entire film, they had very little time. Prot had a "deadline" -- if it was a countdown to a return to his home-planet or to a complete mental breakdown, either way it was a real deadline.  <sep>  Q: What can you tell me about the K-Pax Alien?
[A]: Yes


[Q]: CONTEXT: He usually runs unopposed. The only time he did run against anyone he lost but that was to Sideshow Bob. Quimby was re-instated when Bob is found guilty of fraud and imprisoned. He also survives a recall election, with no candidate in the race against him garnering the five percent necessary to force a recall  <sep>  Q: Why is Mayor Quimby still mayor? A: He usually runs unopposed  Q: Has it ever been addressed on the show? A: Sideshow Bob. Qu  Q: Why do they not address how inappropriate he is for the job on the show? A: The only time he did run against anyone he lost but that was to Sideshow Bob. Quimby was re-instated when Bob is found guilty of fraud and imprisoned  Q: What do you believe he is the reason he is still mayor of Springfield? A: He also survives a recall election, with no candidate in the race against him garnering the five percent necessary to force a recall  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Why is five percent necessary?
[A]:
No