Per this Q&A, robots are allowed to respond to the state of the field, including the rotation of the VEX logo on the Skyrise section and whether or not the Skyrise section is in the autloader. This Q&A allows for removal of the Skyrise from the autoloader by the drive team.
Would it therefore be legal to indirectly control a robot by, for instance, rotating the Skyrise section clockwise to tell the robot to turn clockwise, having it face straight forward to drive forward, and taking the Skyrise section out to tell the robot to stop?
OK, additional situations to make sure I understand properly:
It’s legal to use the presence/absence of the Skyrise to convey information via the state of the field to the robot (e.g. another Skyrise is not put into the autoloader, the robot notices that there is no Skyrise in the autoloader, and therefore stops its routine)
It’s legal to use the rotation of the Skyrise section when placed into the autoloader to convey information via the state of the field to the robot (e.g. the Skyrise is placed into the autloader with the logo facing away from the robot, the robot notices that the logo is facing away, and in response to that it runs the next part of its routine at half speed)
However it’s illegal to continually or repeatedly adjust the state of the Skyrise in the autoloader with the intent of conveying control information to the robot (e.g. a drive team member rotates the Skyrise section while in the autoloader, the robot sees that the logo is at a 45 degree angle relative the perimeter, the robot rotates 45 degrees)
This is where things get fuzzy. We’re not going to legislate that teams place their Skyrise Sections with the logo facing in a certain direction. The intent here is to make things easy for both teams and referees. However, <G8> still applies, teams should not be intentionally performing actions to communicate with their Robots.