[Al Skierkiewicz]

Tristan,
You are going way out on a limb here.
"If the bell or clutch was not a solenoid or motor, then it would not have been prohibited in 2010." The bell is a solenoid and so is the clutch you show. I have worked on a couple of hundred of these air conditioning clutches over the years. The clutch plate is pulled by the magnetic field set up by the electric current. The pull mates a frictional plate with a metallic plate to lock the pulley to the drive shaft of the compressor. If you stick your finger between the plates when you energize the coil it will get pinched.

"This is exclusive with respect to motors and solenoid actuators, but not exclusive with respect to actuators that are neither motors nor solenoids." What actuator is neither a solenoid or a motor or a pneumatic part?

"Since the 2012 rule is exclusive, it works the opposite way: if the bell or clutch is a solenoid, then it must meet the requirements for solenoid actuators. If it is not a solenoid actuator (or a legal motor), it is prohibited." Exactly!

"Though admittedly the rules aren't clear about this, for 2012 there isn't really any reason why any motor couldn't be considered a custom circuit...there's no significant discrepancy between the motor requirements and custom circuit requirements. I doubt this is necessarily what FIRST intended, but at least it doesn't conflict." How can you draw this conclusion from both the motor list that you state is an exclusive list (excludes all motors not on the list) and from the custom circuit rules which prevent any custom circuit from direct control of a motor?

[R47]
Custom circuits shall not directly alter the power pathways between the battery, PD Board, speed controllers, relays, motors, or other elements of the Robot control system (including the power pathways to other sensors or circuits).

So what exactly are you thinking could appear on an FRC robot that is neither a solenoid nor a motor nor a pneumatic part, that would be in your mind, a legal actuator?