[Tristan Lall]

I'm definitely a proponent of using tape as an engineering material, and not a fan of the rules that used to prohibit it.

When the level of competition is as high as it is, those teams that resort to injudicious use of tape will probably be putting themselves at a disadvantage compared to their opposition—but if a team is determined to operate that way, I don't see any important reason to force them to always use another solution. (If I see a robot taped together, structurally, I might mention that they should probably improve it, but we shouldn't have to insist upon it as a matter of following the rules.)

Also, there are a lot of tapes out there, and using them can be a totally valid solution to an engineering challenge. I don't need to list all of the properties of tape that can be advantageous, but one stands out: it's quick to work with. Especially at smaller regionals (where teams will often go straight from the exit of the field back into the queue), or in the elimination rounds (where pit access is impractical), the ability to make quick repairs does more to keep the level of competition high than does an arbitrary restriction on the legal fastening methods.

There will be ugly robots, no matter what elements are permitted. And if someone wants to use duct tape all over their robot, it's their robot that will suffer aesthetically in contrast to the ones that look polished and presentable. But if all that duct tape means that they can spend more time on tweaking the things that matter, like their autonomous mode or their gearboxes, then maybe they've made a good engineering choice.