[Renegade 13]

From the previous link:

...the competing proposal, which inserts the criterion that a planet must be 'by far the largest body in its population of bodies'...

To me, this seems like a far worse proposal than a definition based upon gravity. After all, it's extremely ambiguous. They'd first have to define "By far the largest"; how much larger? 50%? 100%? 200? They'd also have to define "Population of bodies". By this would they include all of the Kuiper Belt as being part of the whole Pluto area population? That defines an absolutely massive area. If you're going to include that many cubic light-minutes as an area in which you can only have one planet and it has to be a lot bigger than anything else, then why not include all of the solar system up to Jupiter as being another area? After all, even with that great an area included as a "population of bodies", it would still be a hell of a lot smaller than the entire Kuiper Belt/Oort Cloud region which, it sounds like, this proposal wants to have recognized as being a single "population of bodies". If that were the case, only Jupiter would be a planet! Even it might not make it, since Saturn is relatively close in size. Come to think of it, by the strict application of this definition, you probably wouldn't have ANY planets in the solar system! Nothing could meet the criteria!

Whew. Hope that made sense, though I doubt it did. Even I can barely decipher what I meant to say!