TASK DEFINITION: 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.
PROBLEM: Question: What is the history of the word "troubleshoot"? At face value, it seems to be mean "aiming for trouble." Which must be short-hand for locating the source of the trouble by reproducing it under different circumstances. How did the term come to be? Who were the first "troubleshooters"? 
Answer: Why would anyone not see an original link to guns in the term? The logic would flow from issues in the old American West which was, for the most part, lawless. In those days, if a rancher or farmer had trouble with wild animals attacking his livelihood, his first recourse would be to shoot the offending animal. If claim jumpers were bothering (troubling) miners, they got shot. If some patron caused trouble in a bar, he got shot. Even the Indians of the day were prone to pull down telegraph wires that the White Man put up across their territory. Doing so made them troublemakers that required troubleshooters to balance the scales. This begs the answer that the term evolved to describe telegraph repair that would require firepower to back it up.

SOLUTION: no

PROBLEM: Question: What's the difference between the following examples: Neither of my teachers are mathematicians. None of my teachers are mathematicians. 
Answer: Neither - not either - implies that there is a choice of only two. So "neither of my teachers" is only correct if there are exactly two teachers, "none of my teachers" can be any number.

SOLUTION: yes

PROBLEM: Question: I'm currently writing an article that includes two contexts of communication: effectiveness and competence. Incompetent people can misuse terminology all day and the ideas are effective and do technically work. However I'm looking for a word or term that has two or more meanings and the misuse of could lead to bodily harm or even death; this is to promote the idea of the aspect of competently communicating one's ideas. What word if not used competently could end up leading to injury or death in a context that most people could understand with little-to-no explanation? 
Answer: This may not be exactly what you are looking for, but might work in the context. inflammable Many people see the "in" as a negative prefix, and believe anything marked inflammable is flame retardant. However, both flammable and inflammable have the same meaning: ...both mean "capable of being easily ignited and of burning quickly." This makes no sense to the Modern English speaker. In English, we think of in- as a prefix that means "not": inactive means "not active," inconclusive means "not conclusive," inconsiderate means "not considerate." Therefore, inflammable should mean "not flammable." -Merriam Webster Because of this, volatile or combustible materials are often labeled as "flammable" to avoid a potentially hazardous misinterpretation.

SOLUTION:
yes