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.

Ex Input:
Question: Whenever I hear statements like "It was a great deal for he and I" and "Call Karen and I in the morning," I die a little. Such solecisms, as Twain said in another context (Cooper's prose style), "grate upon the fastidious ear." Moreover, I know that these things will likely become accepted usage in time, if that hasn't already happened. As someone who tries to be careful with words and speech, I feel almost a moral obligation to hold the line against this kind of decline. I'm not a word snob; I say "ain't" when it works for emphasis, and so on. I've tried suggesting the grammatical alternative to the above constructions, but even when I phrase my suggestion in the gentlest possible way it never works well and I almost always wind up feeling pedantic and priggish at best, and at worst I feel I've alienated someone. What's the general opinion here? Is it best to just let these things slide or to take up the fight? In sum, is there a good way to promote good grammar, or at least protect it from the most egregious violations? 
Answer: There is nothing wrong with having gut reactions to the way that people say things. I am completely aware that the standard/educated version of a language is arbitrary (i.e. is no more "correct" in any real sense than any dialect), and even still, I have pet peeves and things that irk me about people's language usage. I think these are unavoidable, just like my reaction to certain fashion choices that people make in their outfits. But, like with fashion, there is very little objective truth to my judgment about any of it. I try not to actually challenge people on uses that bother me; aside from the arbitrariness of language, every bit of evidence suggests that stopping language change in any significant way is like going to the beach and trying to stop the tide from coming in. There was a more in-depth discussion about this in a previous question. That said, I do believe there is a certain time and place where standards and clarity are important. In formal contexts, information is often supposed to be presented in a certain way, and, generally, these conventions benefit everyone. Also, following certain language conventions in these situations can eliminate ambiguity. If I am asked to proofread an academic paper that my colleague has written, I would make corrections for things that I would never object to otherwise.

Ex Output:
yes


Ex Input:
Question: Is the following correct, or is there more to it? "I forgot his name" I knew his name, but I forgot it. "I forget his name" I keep forgetting his name. Where using "forget" basically means that you tried to remember this information before as well, but you couldn't then either. 
Answer: I forgot his name means I've permanently forgotten, while I forget his name means I've temporarily forgotten even though I expect to be able to remember. In a few more minutes I'll probably remember. See also the phrases "slipped my mind" or "the tip of my tongue".

Ex Output:
no


Ex Input:
Question: Let's say I'm always hungry, even after I have my meal(s). What would be a word to express that? IMHO, I think starving, famished won't be applicable as these words would only describe the current situation. 
Answer: Consider insatiable [appetite]. Insatiable means: always wanting more : not able to be satisfied (MW) Impossible to satiate or satisfy: an insatiable appetite (TFD) For example, Most children like to eat but for some an insatiable appetite means they always want more, causing real problems for parents. (BBC) The woman is insatiable. When the final whistle blows, she's eaten twenty-three sandwiches in ten minutes, setting a world record (Eat this Book) [Children] may go through phases where they seem to eat relatively little or are insatiable. (Feeding the Under 5s).

Ex Output:

yes