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: What is an English adjective to describe the following skill: "able to learn new things quickly"? For example: Billy is very _________, as he learns new skills more quickly than an average person. 
Answer: Fast learner or quick learner.
[A]: yes


[Q]: 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: Correction: what annoys you is people writing "would of" when they are saying /wdv/, which is the standard pronunciation of the contraction would've. The vowel of the preposition "of" is almost always reduced in actual speech, yielding /v/. Thus "would've" and "would of" are homophones. So no surprise that some people spell it that way, even though it makes no grammatical sense. Would've can be even further reduced to /wd/, which some people spell woulda as a kind of phonetic eye dialect to represent actual speech or set an informal tone. The same goes for the modals, shoulda, coulda, musta. Spelling as it sounds can yield amusing results: Along the way the details of his past are sordid out and he realizes that what he once thought about his parents isn't the truth at all. Amazon.com Review. A speaker of British English, of course, would never write sorted in this manner, but with an American flapped t, it's a perfect fit.
[A]: yes


[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 comes from "My Lords, Ladies and Gentlemen". Titled men come first (My Lords); then their spouses [My] Ladies; Ladies also include non-titled ladies; and finally, untitled men (Gentlemen). Debretts, Preamble Precedents The following list gives the form in which important guests should be included in a preamble in order of precedence: Your Royal Highness My Lord Mayor (My Lord Provost, etc) See (i) Mr Recorder (outside London) Mr Chairman of the ...... County Council (outside Greater London) My Lord Chancellor Prime Minister (or, more formally, Mr. Prime Minister). See (ii) Your Excellency (ies) (this refers to Ambassadors and High Commissioners) Your Grace(s). See (iii) My Lord(s). See (iv) Ladies and Gentlemen. See (v) If you want to know what the footnotes (i) through (v) say, so you will be absolutely correct at your next speech, click on the link.
[A]:
no