Exactly!
The issue isn't whether or not Pluto is a planet. The issue is making a working definition. What is irritating is that some warped preconceived bias that Pluto is not a planet was allowed to over ride scientific sense and allow approval of such a lame misguided and obviously bogus definition. I don't have a problem with Pluto not being a planet even though I think it is, as long as a definition is made which is relatively rigorous. Even a line in the sand at a certain diameter as arbitrary as that is preferable to the lame and vague local area clause. At least it's rigorous.