I think not for the default (i.e., no prompt from instructor) case. I think it should be really obvious that a mistake was made in question configuration or that they hit a bug in the code. Once we're in a place where we've got minimal authoring (reliable xml or whatever) I'd like to elide this back to simply say "...is unconfigured." and be as maximally harsh as Lyla and Talbs will let us be. I don't want students to ever enter something thinking they're supposed to enter something, when they're really not.

I agree that it may make sense to use the censorship prompt for the default scenario xml, though I think that that's a change that should go into future PRs.