I read and write about plot holes, here and on reddit, and over the years I have come to feel that there are enough inconsistencies in the conventional wisdom concerning what does and doesn't constitute a legitimate plot hole that the entire concept seems unworkable. And yet, it's unquestionably a useful term that most people readily agree they understand -- so it seems there must be something there.
I want to ask the Movies.SE community to provide a formal definition of "plot hole." Not a simple dictionary definition, but the kind of rigorous, analytical definition that philosophers use. I have some acceptance criteria in mind, and some problem cases to consider, which I'd refine and then put into my question if it's on-topic.
I wouldn't be asking this question for the purpose of adjusting tagging or other practices here on Movies.SE, although I suppose something like that might seem appealing if the question yields great answers. I'm just a philosophy-of-film person who is starting to wonder if he has drawn the wrong conceptual boundaries.