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.

[Q]: Question: Possible Duplicate: When to drop the 'e' when ending in -able? Both are correct for these words: sizable, sizeable sharable, shareable takable, takeable But these words are incorrect: storeable (storable) makeable (makable) tasteable (tastable) minglable (mingleable) acknowledgable (acknowledgeable) managable (manageable) Are there rules for this? The case for keeping the "e" seems to be that the "ga" in "acknowledgable" would be read as "gall" rather than "germ", but "minglable" shouldn't cause that problem. I'm also not sure why we couldn't keep the "e" in words like "storable" or "makable". 
Answer: The general rule is that you drop the e, provided that it's actually a silent one rather than forming part of an ee digraph as with agreeable, decreeable, disagreeable, foreseeable, and seeable. You only otherwise have to keep a final silent e when adding able if it would (1) either change the pronunciation, or (2) it would cause a collision with an existing word that already means something else altogether different. The first case, pronunciation shift, is for things like raceable or purgeable, where losing the e would make the ce or ge switch from the "soft" version to the "hard" version due to the resulting g or c now being followed by an a rather than by an e, and cable and gable are pronounced quite differently. The second case, a collision with an existing word, occurs with such pairs as pareable / parable, placeable / placable, probeable / probable, and spareable / sparable. Notice how placeable also has the first factor in play, as too would singeable / singable. Beyond that, there is some slight variation in acceptable forms, such as both microwaveable / microwavable being attested. Normally however, you lose the e. The OED2 attests 1555 words than end in able but not in eable, while only 123 that do actually end in eable. That's a ratio of nearly 13 to 1 in favor of more able words without a preceding e. Not excluding duplicates with alternate spellings, here are the eable words from the OED2 plus quarterly supplements since 2000: acknowledgeable decreeable haveable mingleable salvageable acreable defaceable hireable mortgageable scribbleable activeable delineable holeable nameable seeable adduceable derangeable hopeable negligeable serviceable advanceable disagreeable imageable noticeable shakeable agreeable dischargeable immalleable packageable shapeable allegeable discourageable impermeable pareable shareable arrangeable displaceable inassuageable passageable sizeable balanceable divorceable indulgeable peaceable skateable batheable dyeable ineffaceable permeable sliceable biteable effaceable influenceable pierceable spareable blameable embraceable interchangeable placeable stageable bounceable enforceable irremeable pledgeable strangleable bridgeable exchangeable irreplaceable policeable swindleable carriageable experienceable irretraceable poseable takeable challengeable eyeable judgeable probeable tallageable chanceable fleeceable knowledgeable pronounceable tameable changeable foreseeable likeable purgeable tasteable chargeable forgeable liveable raceable throttleable chaseable garbleable lodgeable rateable traceable chooseable gaugeable malleable reable vengeable commenceable giveable manageable rebukeable voyageable cuddleable gorgeable marriageable replaceable whistleable damageable grazeable microwaveable ropeable danceable hateable mineable saleable As you see, there is also some tendancy to preserve the final e if in the original it's there to make a so-called "long" vowel long. However, this doesn't happen consistently enough to make a rule for them. However, for those cases there are a lot of alternate "sans"-e forms for those, like ropeable / ropable. Perhaps a more interesting question and certainly one with a more complicated answer is how to know which words instead take ible forms. There are 275 of these in the OED2, more than twice as many as eable words. There are actual rules there, although they are a bit complicated for some people. That one I'll leave for when it actually gets asked. :).
[A]: yes


[Q]: Question: Ok, if I say "this car is too expensive" or "this car is very expensive", then I can not express the connotation of "expensive". However, if I say "this car is damn expensive" then I better convey the connotation of "expensive". So my question is: What is the English idiom about "expensive" that expresses the idea that "It is so expensive that you feel like you got ripped-off and/or overcharged and/or unmeaningfully expensive"? For example, "damn expensive" could be ok but is there any other term? 
Answer: stiff v. Usually applied to describe "to fail or refuse to tip a server," to stiff also means more generally "to cheat someone out of money." e.g. You said your brother-in-law would give me a fair deal, so I was surprised that he would stiff me out of so much money.
[A]: no


[Q]: Question: Is there a specific reason for this? After all, it is "boys and girls", rather than "girls and boys". If the boy (male) comes first here, why doesn't it come first in "ladies and gentlemen"? 
Answer: It probably has to do with the phonetic and metrical properties of "ladies and gentlemen" versus "gentlemen and ladies." Say them both out loud and see which one sounds better to you, intuitively. The metrical pattern of "ladies and gentlemen" consists of (arguably) two dactyls. A dactyl is a group of three syllables where the first is stressed and the second two are unstressed. When these occur in succession, they are pleasant to the ear. ladies and gentlemen DUM da da / DUM da da The metrical pattern of "gentlemen and ladies" falls into a much less regular pattern. It is less pleasant to the ear. It is something like a stressed syllable followed by three unstressed syllables followed by a stressed syllable followed by an unstressed syllable. gentlemen and ladies DUM da da da DUM da Our language tends to organize itself according to regular and pleasant stress patterns. My guess is that is why we feel more drawn to "ladies and gentlemen" than "gentlemen and ladies" and why the former has conventionalized.
[A]:
yes