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.
--------
Question: Question: I'm looking for a word the describes the concluding text of a document, i.e. the opposite of the document's preamble. Is it just "conclusion"? 
Answer: Conclusion, afterword, and epilogue all seem to fit the bill. There's also postamble, but I believe that's more of a computer science term for data transactions.

Answer: yes


Question: Question: Which is correct? The thief carried the knife carefully so as not to cut himself. The thief carried the knife carefully not to cut himself. 
Answer: The first one. The second one sounds quite awkward, and in fact one way I can think of to improve it would be to add a comma: "The thief carried the knife carefully, not to cut himself". The slight pause is meant to suggest the missing "so as"!.

Answer: yes


Question: Question: I often read the expression "would of" used instead of "would have". Each time I read it I get annoyed so I googled it and found out -as I expected- that it is an incorrect way to say "would have". Now, there are a lot of brilliant slang words/expressions, so my question is, why do people use this one? It's so annoying to read, stupid and clearly wrong, it is pointless, why did they come up with this expression? Edit: I don't think my question is a duplicate as I didn't ask how can somebody use it (since I know it's incorrect and I know that I can use it with commas giving it a different meaning) but I asked why and how people came up with this expression. 
Answer: Great question. I also get annoyed when I see this phrase, especially from people who should know better. At one of my old jobs year ago, I worked with an account manager who actually used that phrase in an e-mail, saying something like "I should of known better". Yes, an account manager "should of" had a better education to know proper grammar... or at least know that's not a phrase used by professionals. Even though the phrase might be pronounced and heard as "should of" (or "would of" or "could of"), there's no such phrase in written English. No school that I've heard of teaches this phrase and basic rules of grammar "abbreviate the word have as 've". And writing "should of" takes just as many characters to write as "should've", so it's not like it's text-speak. In my opinion, it's people being stupid, ignorant, or trying to be funny/ hip/ trendy by using the wrong phrase. Then other people see it and want to be in on the joke, so they use it also.

Answer:
no