I would consider this ruling to at the very least open the door to a distinction between “Stacked” in a scoring sense, and stacked in a mechanical sense. The way i read this ruling, it is intended that the robot may touch the stacked cones, on a mobile goal, for purposes of stability. If it ends the match holding them up, they are not scored as “Stacked”, but they do not violate the possession limit.
In the tipped goal method, it has been ruled here:
That the cones would not be counted as “Stacked”, but i could easily see the allowance of contact in the same principle of stabilizing a stack of cones on a mobile goal before the final score, without it violating possession limits.
This certainly does not equate to a ruling of legality, but to me, it certainly leaves it open until their is an official ruling.