Channel
@AEJAD_ESP
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
1,891subscribers
-2 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001261294216 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @AEJAD_ESP |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 August 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 26 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 3 times, most recently 26 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/AEJAD_ESP |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Aug 2026, 02:56 | 1,891 | -2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 23:49 | 1,893 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 21:02 | 1,893 | first reading |
19 posts held, back to 21 February 2026 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 19 posts for this entry, the most recent from 26 June 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
410 reactions across 19 posts, in 14 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 24.4% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 100 | 24.4% | |
| 🤬 | 77 | 18.8% | |
| 👏 | 74 | 18.0% | |
| 👍 | 60 | 14.6% | |
| 🔥 | 47 | 11.5% | |
| 🤯 | 16 | 3.90% | |
| 😁 | 15 | 3.66% | |
| 😢 | 5 | 1.22% | |
| 😱 | 5 | 1.22% | |
| 🙏 | 3 | 0.732% | |
| 🤩 | 3 | 0.732% | |
| 👎 | 2 | 0.488% | |
| 🥰 | 2 | 0.488% | |
| 😍 | 1 | 0.244% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 19 of the 19 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 410reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 21 February 2026 to 26 June 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
📖La revista Joc Privat difunde nuestra propuesta y la serie de tuits con nuestras propuestas concretas de cambios en la Ley del Juego: https://x.com/i/status/2070374491759210908 https://x.com/i/status/2070374483290992990 Se lo agradecemos con ❤️+🔁?
👏13👍1🙏1
🔥«¿Qué pasaría si la Ley del Juego dijese…?» 🔥 Las 6 frases que hemos pedido a la DGOJ que metan en la ley… si ya estuviesen «publicadas en el BOE» 👀 Cada una es sencilla. Cada una protege al usuario. Y cada una les molesta a las casas de apuestas. Por algo será 🤔 Spoiler: si estas frases NO acaban en la ley, la pregunta es muy simple… ¿a quién protege el regulador? 😡 📲 Difunde👇 https://x.com/AEJAD_ESP/status/206…
❤14
📄 Os compartimos el documento completo a continuación. Leedlo, difundidlo y, si podéis, comentadlo en X.
❤7👏3👍2
🚨 LO HEMOS LLEVADO A LA DGOJ 🚨 SE ACABÓ MIRAR PARA OTRO LADO Hoy AEJAD ha presentado ante el regulador sus aportaciones para reformar la Ley del Juego, una oportunidad única. Y vamos de frente 👇 ❌ Las casas con licencia cierran y limitan a quien GANA, a quien piensa, a quien usa la cabeza. ¿La excusa? Acusarte de "fraude" o de "ludopatía"… ¡sin que hayas perdido un euro! 🙄 📉 Y los datos OFICIALES cantan: el 77,58% …
👏18🔥5❤4👍2🤩1😍1
HABEMUS RESPUESTA! 7 meses nada más y nada menos... sin sorpresa... 🚨 La DGOJ reconoce el problema… pero no parece querer solucionarlo. Hemos preguntado al regulador cuántas cuentas de jugadores se cierran, limitan o restringen por motivos comerciales: jugadores ganadores, política de riesgo del operador, clientes “no rentables”, etc. ¿La respuesta? 👉 Que no pueden dar esos datos porque “no existe una categoría e…
👏10🤬7🔥6❤3🥰1
🚨Consulta a la DGOJ: plazos y “calidad del servicio” https://x.com/AEJAD_ESP/status/2059681094790742247?s=20 ✅ La Carta de Servicios de la DGOJ dice que atenderá consultas en ≤ 60 días naturales. 📌 Nuestra consulta se confirmó el 14/11/2025 y sigue “En estudio” hoy... ⏳ Han pasado más de 190 días. ⚠️Hemos enviado RECLAMACIÓN por incumplimiento 😏 Quizá el retraso es porque están preparando una respuesta muy elab…
🤬20🔥2❤1😱1
🚨 EL PP LLEVA AL CONGRESO EL ALGORITMO DE LA DGOJ 🚨 https://x.com/AEJAD_ESP/status/2057503883186798833?s=20 El Partido Popular ha preguntado al Gobierno por el algoritmo que la DGOJ quiere implantar para detectar “comportamientos de riesgo” en el juego online. Y ojo: muchas de las preguntas van directamente en la línea de lo que AEJAD lleva meses reclamando. 📌 Preguntan por: 🔹 el grado real de desarrollo del algori…
❤12🔥5👍2👏1
🚨 LA ÚLTIMA OPORTUNIDAD PARA CAMBIAR LA LEY DEL JUEGO https://www.ordenacionjuego.es/novedades/dgoj-abre-consulta-publica-modificacion-ley-regulacion-juego Que la DGOJ y el legislador se atrevan a responder: 👉 ¿Puede una casa de apuestas discriminar usuarios? 👉 ¿Puede cerrar cuentas o impedir nuevos registros porque un usuario no le interesa económicamente? 👉 ¿Puede quedarse sólo con los jugadores que le convienen?…
❤17👍6👏4🔥3
https://x.com/AEJAD_ESP/status/2051932699821056253?s=20
❤3
🚨 LA DGOJ NO PUEDE HACER COMO SI NO PASARA NADA 🚨 AZARplus ha publicado que AEJAD ha impugnado ante Bruselas el mecanismo de detección de “riesgo” de la DGOJ https://x.com/AEJAD_ESP/status/2051932699821056253 Esto es importante porque el debate ya no está solo en documentos técnicos, alegaciones o trámites europeos: empieza a salir públicamente en medios del sector. ❓ LA PREGUNTA ES MUY SENCILLA 👉 ¿La DGOJ va a …
👍6❤3👏2🤬2😱1🙏1
🚨 ATENCIÓN: NECESITAMOS AYUDA 🚨 https://x.com/AEJAD_ESP/status/2049862501039292805?s=20 La DGOJ sigue adelante con su algoritmo de detección de “conductas de riesgo” como si no pasara nada. Lo presentan en congresos internacionales como una herramienta pionera para proteger a los usuarios, pero mientras tanto los usuarios hemos presentado alegaciones técnicas muy serias y, por ahora, parece que nos están ignorando …
👍17🔥8❤7🤬4👏2🥰1😢1
📺 Nuevo vídeo de la DGOJ: le hacemos preguntas directas a Mikel Arana La DGOJ ha publicado un vídeo donde el Director General habla de dos temas que nos afectan directamente: la herramienta de detección de comportamientos de riesgo y el informe sobre mujeres y juego. Hemos dejado 9 preguntas en los comentarios del vídeo. Las principales: 🔍 Sobre la herramienta de detección: ¿Quién se hace responsable de los falsos p…
👍7❤2👏2🔥1
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @AEJAD_ESP. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank — 408,994 of 1,620,455entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 19 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“AEJAD” (@AEJAD_ESP), 1,891 subscribers as measured 19 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/AEJAD_ESP.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.