The problem with planetary scientists answering this type of survey is quite simple - each one will lest their own field of expertise and projects as the number one priority. So you really have a document which is really a glorious "Keep funding ME!" appeal.

Those agendas are so skewed that I don't think even 5% of the public would have Pluto exploration even in a top 50 list of science goals!

Pluto is still a mystery - but is far less interesting than the moons of Jupiter and realistically has less potential for increasing our scientific knowledge base.

The orbiter missions to Uranus and Neptune are far more appealing to me - and I would have ranked them much higher
than it ranked.

I am always amazed at how ineffective the scientific community is at rallying the public to their cause. For all the intellectual potential in this group - almost none grasp the concept of public relations.

The needed mantra:
"Funding is proportionate to public approval/desire"

Repeat 100 times daily. ;-)

Even the names of these missions are amazingly un-PR-savvy. Just calling a space probe and mission a cool name would give it extra press and create more public familiarity with a mission.

PLUTO PHI-LANDER-R (LMAO)
TITANO!
Jupiter-Juggernaut
Nexus-Neptune Spaceship
"Crater-Creature"

Just another opinion,

SDAI-Tech1