I'm more interested in pursuing asteroid mining projects and exploring the possibly water bearing bodies such as Europa, Titan, Mars, comets, etc.
It seems pretty clear cut for me why a barren rock is less interesting than a multi-layered moon or planet with its own atmosphere, homeostatic climate and or termo-chemical dynamics and potential for life.
And I know Pluto will turn out more interesting than previously assumed, it's just that Pluto's upper bound of the function of being mysterious is far lower in number to say, probing Jupiter-Saturn moons, or even Venus, Athena-other group asteroid fields and so on.
To me the whole mission is a bit more of a marketing venture, since it's the solid core body classically assumed to be the last planet (now dwarf planet, but only recently and not in pop-culture), so it's venturing to the far corners of our system and doing the whole superlative (farthest, fastest, biggest) sport that doesn't appeal to me in this project.
For me, the
Cassini-Huygens is a good example of an interesting mission, with a nice plan and goals (not that Pluto isn't, it is but less for the reasons stated). I guess we have the obligation to check it out before we cross it off and forget it even mattered historically.
I also do realise the Pluto new horizons project is roughly 5 times cheaper than Cassini, so I don't expect fireworks, it has to be done at some point so it could be now.
