64 seen 2 reacts Not good? Just asking
Signed FOXY CC

Channel
@CRUXTOSERVER
On this record: Topic Β· Previous handles Β· Growth Β· Engagement Β· What this channel posts Β· Reactions Β· Posts Β· Polls Β· Citations Β· Handles named that no longer answer Β· Cite this entry
833subscribers
+522 since we began measuring on 9 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register Β· movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003807437108 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @CRUXTOSERVER |
| Created | Between 1 February 2026 and 31 July 2026 β estimated from Telegramβs id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 9 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 9 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 13 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 9 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/CRUXTOSERVER |
Other / unclassifiable β a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channelβs own recent posts on 21 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 42% confidence. This is a modelβs judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured β it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
@CRUXTOSERVER was previously reachable at this handle, before switching to its current one. This says nothing about who or what answers at the old handle today β only that this channel no longer does.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 9 Nov 2026, 15:06 | 833 | +5 |
| 9 Nov 2026, 01:22 | 828 | no change |
| 9 Nov 2026, 00:47 | 828 | +85 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 23:58 | 743 | +33 |
| 13 Oct 2026, 00:39 | 710 | +90 |
| 3 Oct 2026, 13:19 | 620 | +167 |
| 18 Sept 2026, 22:20 | 453 | +49 |
| 10 Sept 2026, 02:40 | 404 | -7 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 17:43 | 411 | +13 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 21:28 | 398 | +57 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 19:47 | 341 | +32 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 19:51 | 309 | -2 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 20:15 | 311 | first reading |
35 posts held, back to 8 August 2026 β the reader has not yet reached the start of this channelβs public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 2 pages of Telegramβs post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) Γ· views β note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegramβs public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 11 of 16 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days Β· latest post in window 8 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 35 (8 August 2026 β 8 November 2026) |
| Views total | 1,226 |
| Reactions total | 48 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface β not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 9 Nov 2026, 01:22 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than βcorrectingβ the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form β 8.12K, 3.7M β so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded β read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Measured directly from 4 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel β not this channelβs whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegramβs own rounded chrome, so it carries no β mark.
55 reactions across 15 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 43.6% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| β€ | 24 | 43.6% | |
| customΒ 5122951434920265454 | 22 | 40.0% | |
| π₯ | 4 | 7.27% | |
| β€βπ₯ | 3 | 5.45% | |
| π | 2 | 3.64% |
Custom emoji. One row above is a Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id β no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The count beside it is Telegramβs.
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 β π is thanks in one channel and mourning in another β 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 β 4.34K, 1.2M β 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 15 of the 35 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegramβs own count on each post β not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above β those same posts carry 55 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by βa reaction total printed elsewhere on the pageβ.
Measured over the 35 most recent posts we hold, published 8 August 2026 to 8 November 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.
Telegramβs own βeditedβ marker: 2 of 16 posts held from the last 30 days (12.5%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before β this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
64 seen 2 reacts Not good? Just asking
Signed FOXY CC
2 more gang, do fastπ₯
Signed ββππππ
π₯ΆWANT THIS PREMIUM Edge Glowπ₯ PROJECT HERE ππ»
π1
Signed β‘οΈMANSURI.AM π₯
WANT THIS BATMAN PFP RACE π GIVE 17 REACTS FOR RACE π MADE IN - AMZ β€οΈβπ₯ ONLY 3 WINNER'S GET THIS PFP π
β€10π₯4customΒ 51229514349202654544
Signed A V E S H
Sorry for late guyss Take it..
π1
Signed A V E S H
Want this basic spiderman outroβ¨? Qr after 6 reactsβ€οΈ Dm to buy :- @FOXYBROSUNO β£οΈ Made In :- AMZ π₯ Made By :- @FOXYBROSUNOπ NOTE :- GIVE CREDIT TO ME { @FOXYBROSUNO } IF YOUR NOT USING THIS JUST FOR YOUR PERSONAL USE π ( I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WILL USE IT REALLY OR NOT)
β€4
Signed FOXY CC
3rd race winner π KK_EDITS
customΒ 51229514349202654545
Signed A V E S H
2nd race winner π Karthikeya bruh
customΒ 51229514349202654543
Signed A V E S H
First Race winner π Galax Edits
customΒ 51229514349202654545
Signed A V E S H
RACE START π GIVE SOME ONLINE REACTS...
β€βπ₯3customΒ 51229514349202654542
Signed A V E S H
Posted without readable text
Signed Inside Ads
πππππππππ πππππππππ ππ ππππ πππππππ βοΈ π πππππππ π πππ ππππ πππππππππ ππππππ ππππ... β‘
β€1
Signed ππΌππ ππ
Showing the 12 most recent of 35 posts we hold for @CRUXTOSERVER. 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 β was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it β t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so β1,200,000 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.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A pollβs figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
WHO IS THE BEST ADMIN IN THIS CHANNEL?
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only β there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each optionβs share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each optionβs own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 35 most recent posts we hold, published 8 August 2026 to 8 November 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind β an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results β and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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 3 registered channels β 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 β that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting todayβs namer to yesterdayβs owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason β 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 β the βNamed by N registered channelsβ figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
@CRUXTOSERVER named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handleβs history β see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today β not that anything βdiedβ. How this is measured.
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant β a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
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 9 November 2026 β this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
βπΎπππππ ππππππβ (@CRUXTOSERVER), 833 subscribers as measured 9 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/CRUXTOSERVER.
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 Β· 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.