Abolish Neo Prog as a genre?

ouch.. I wouldn't touch this with a ten foot pole

"Neo Prog" is primarily an outdated term applied to 80s bands after punk and disco, and was used at that time. But now, it bears no relevance, and is contradictory to a function of ProgArchives--namely that bands should be categorized according to sound and not according to time period or national movements. Now, many Neo Prog bands have the same sound (I'll get to that in a minute) but this is an ad hoc adjustment to justify the misnomer of the name. Therefore, the name applied to this music needs to change. But what is this music?

What baffles me sometimes is how people draw the line between modern "symphonic" prog and modern "neo prog." No one has properly explained A) how the bands in this genre are symphonic in nature and B) why it is even appropriate to apply a classical concept to rock music. it seems to me that Neo Prog has been narrowly defined by the sound of the bands in the 80s, even though the term implies a time period and not a sound. It seems blatantly obvious that Neo Prog has been defined as having a guitar-bass-keyboard-drums-singer style, and that any variation in this setup will result in an "upgrade" (or "reclassification" if you want your truth without the unsaid meanings). How else can one justify Spock's Beard as symphonic if not because they use an organ from time to time?

As the situation is now, Neo Prog is thought of as a second-class genre if not outright treated as one. Some things you just can't change. Some people will think anything that is memorable is not prog enough, and some don't like their prog to have any solidified beat or keyboards. But Neo Prog is a sham of a genre right now, and it is because of the narrowly defined requirements of it. It just so happens that these requirements aren't enjoyed by many prog fans, and so it's an easy target.

From where I'm sitting, I see no really good reason to have Neo Prog and Symphonic prog separate genres.