Asteroids and lesser-known planets?

Question

I know many astrologers don't count the positions of asteroids and newly-discovered planets when making a chart. I don't really see any reason that they shouldn't other than they are not as well-researched, and I would like to hear what people have to say about this.

As an example, go here: http://goddess.astrology.com/juno/signs.html (or somewhere better that you know of) and find out your 'juno sign' as they call it and tell me if you think the result sounds correct. There are others, too, and I would appreciate any insight into these types of aspects.

Or, if you're not bothered at this point, please tell me your experiences of reading the positions of asteroids and lesser-known planets in charts alongside the main planets.

Answer 1

There are moon of the gas giant planets that are larger than our moon, Mercury, and Pluto. These are not used though size and distance does not diminish a planets effect according to astrologers. There is a asteroid named after James Randi. Does this influence skeptics?

Answer 2

As a professional, I find included every asteroid and little tidbit of info a little overwhelming... plus, we haven't really had enough time to observe their effects.

Pluto was discovered in the 1930s but it was another 30-40 years before it was used regularly by all astrologers....

Chiron is another example. It was only discovered in the 1970s. I keep an eye on it, but I don't use if often in my chart readings...