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.

Example Input: Question: I want to ask whether I can use the word "Fuck" in a formal context. Apparently, the word dates back to the early 16th century, so it shouldn't be considered slang (although, it is misused as slang for other reasons), but regardless of its vulgarity, could I use it in a formal context with its original definition? I imagine that people will be surprised, but when realizing in what context I am using it in, then it will be more understandable and acceptable to use it. Firstly, I do not even know the definition of the word due to its vastness in meaning, I always thought it was an exclamation-like word meaning nothing (for it to mean sexual activities is a slang definition, is that not correct?), but used purely for emphasis. What does it first and foremost mean in its original/accurate and/or formal definition? I also know of another definition of the word "Fuck," which is "I will fuck you" as in "I will defeat you" (in context of fighting or combat), is that a formal definition as well? I mainly ask for this, because I need to use the word in this context, specifically and especially. Also, side question, is it possible not to always make it a vulgar word? Thanks in advance.
Answer: Let's just go ahead and say, no. It's questionable to use expletives here, so... unless you're writing a dissertation on the usage of the word in question, again: no. You shouldn't use any word you don't know the definition of, but here at Stack Exchange you may use them to talk about them. They are permissible when they are the context.
Example Output: yes

Example Input: Question: There is a person in my current daily life who never admits his wrongs. He is always quick to blame others first and always believes that he is not wrong. Even when he is proven wrong, he still believes he shouldn't be sorry and isn't wrong. Is there a single-word adjective to describe this behavior? If not, a better way to describe this person would also make do. While stubborn and irresponsible fit, I feel like they don't tell the whole story. By this, I mean if I were to say to others that he is very stubborn and irresponsible, it is not implicitly implied that he blames others and never acknowledges his own fault. Edit: I believe my question is different because the person will also never acknowledge their wrongdoing. On top of blaming others, even after it has been proven to be their fault, they will not admit wrong doing. So aside from blaming others, they refuse to acknowledge the possibility that they have committed a mistake.
Answer: If he calls attention to the same thing when someone else does it, the word would be hypocrite. Otherwise, weasel seems to have the connotation (when I hear it used) of falsely accusing someone in order to avoid being found out, though I don't see that specified in the definition.
Example Output: no

Example Input: Question: I've heard people say "be king" (as in "I can't wait to be king") in movies and TV. Why don't they say "be a king"? Which is correct?
Answer: Oddly enough, I think "to be king", "to be a king" and "to be the king" are all different. If you say "to be a king", like recognizer says, it would imply one of any number of kings, whereas if you say "to be the king", it would imply one specific king of one specific kingdom. On the other hand, if you say "to be king", it's like you're saying "to have the attributes and/or capabilities that come with being (a/the) king", whichever those are. In other words, one can be "a king" or "the king" and still not "be king", if such states do not apportion to their monarchs the features of "being king". And, one can "be king" even without being "a king" or "the king", if such features are made available in some other way, unlikely as that may be. Note that I'm not talking about metaphorical meanings of "king", here (like, say, the "king of rock'n'roll"), but of literal meanings, such as monarch or ruler.
Example Output:
no