Not yet, and here is why. One screen for two reasons, because both produce the same machinery. Asking does not close the decision, does not move the date, and does not tell the sender you have decided — and the page is careful to promise none of those.
I have a question
Dave gets it, and comes back to you with the answer
I need to see them in person
Dave sorts out where and when
Asking doesn't move the 29th and it doesn't settle anything. The three options stay open while Dave answers.
Send it to Dave Actually, let me just pickAsking does not move the 29th. Only Dave can decide whether to hold the cabinet shop's slot, so the page does not say he will — a screen that promised a new date would be committing his money on his behalf, and would be wrong roughly half the time.
Send it · actually, let me just pick · call Dave. The same three shapes one level down. A screen built for people who are not ready that has no way out is the failure it exists to fix, repeated.
Because I have a question and I need to see them produce identical machinery: the sender learns why, the arithmetic is restated, and a new link arrives when the blocker clears. Two screens for one mechanism is how the two of them drift apart.
Frozen, and simply not yet superseded. When Dave's answer arrives it mints a new link carrying the question, the answer and the same three options, and this one goes to replaced and points at it. A deferral that killed the original would leave somebody who asked a question with nothing to come back to.
Nothing is decided. The reader's real worry after tapping something on a page about money is that they have just committed to something. One sentence, first.
“Can the rift oak come in five weeks instead of seven if we order this week? And is the paint grade the same box, just a different door?”
The decision is still open, the clock is still running, and Dave now knows why. Drawn as a plain no reply it would read as a rejection; drawn as an answer it would close a decision nobody made. It is a fourth thing that arrives, and an earlier draft of the builder spec did not list it.
Answered in —. A deferral is not an answer, so it does not stamp one. Nothing about that number is ever shown to Tom, which would be a nag with a stopwatch on it; it is Dave's measure of his own channel.
Answering mints a new link and demotes the old one to replaced. Saying so on the button's own screen is what stops a builder wondering later why the link he sent on Monday tells his client it is out of date.
Two drawings of the same moment disagreed on a tier boundary: link-decision offers ask the coach a question on the account-less page itself, and link-decide lists the coach among the things an account would add. The second is right, and not for pricing reasons. The coach works because it knows your plans, your contract and what you have already picked; an account-less person has no such record assembled, so a coach on that page would either be a generic chatbot — worse than nothing, and it cheapens the real one — or would need exactly the record they have not got.
What they get instead is this screen, which routes the question to the person who can actually answer it. The paid coach's own best moment is the same refusal: I do not know, and I am not going to guess. This is one to send him.
It never moves the date. Only the builder can hold a slot.
It never closes the decision. The three options stay open the whole time.
It never tells the sender they decided. A deferral in the register is its own state precisely so it cannot be counted as one.