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: I'm describing what an opiate addict looks like before recovery. Instead of saying "he looked like a vampire," I'd like to say something like "he looked [vampiric]." I actually just found out vampiric was a word, but I want something that sounds better (more colloquial/natural, I suppose) and covers a variety of traits (pale, emaciated, sickly, etc). Why I don't just use "vampiric": As @chepner commented: I think the idea is to find a word that isn't so "circular", and doesn't refer explicitly to vampires or require knowledge of vampires in context. If someone were to ask "What does a vampire look like?", then "It looks vampiric/vampirish" wouldn't be terribly helpful. I don't want to explicitly refer to drug addicts as vampires. I just want to capture those traits in the best way.
Answer: There is always the tried and true "strung-out" or "cadaverous" or "corpselike" i like "he had the look of a worn and deflated pillowcase in need of a wash".

SOLUTION: no

PROBLEM: Question: How can I explain to people that the phrase off of is grammatically incorrect? I've heard this phrase used a lot, especially by Americans (though they aren't the only ones). In my understanding, off of should usually be replaced by off, as in, I took the book off the shelf as opposed to I took the book off of the shelf Am I wrong? Or is there perhaps some simple way I can explain this to most people?
Answer: In my opinion, if you mean to say, "off of", then you should instead say, "from". For example, "Take the book off of the bookcase", when, "Take the book from the bookcase", is preferable. As I understand it, the expression "off of", is an Americanism, but the pseudo-antonym, "on of", is rarely (if not never), found in any language as far as I am aware.

SOLUTION: no

PROBLEM: Question: In a scientific article, should I write "3m", "3 m", "3 meters", or "3 [meters]"?
Answer: This guide at the NIST site is a good place to start. In particular, you should write "3 m" as in "The bar is 3 m long.".

SOLUTION:
yes