Channel
@CSW_Espanol
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
36subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001283616790 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @CSW_Espanol |
| Description | Craig Wright en español https://t.me/CSW_Espanol Craig Wright Nivel Basico https://t.me/joinchat/gEhpEKqtm7o2ZDE0 CSW Podcast en español https://t.me/CSWPodcast |
| Created | Between 1 April 2018 and 30 June 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 10 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 10 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/CSW_Espanol |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Aug 2026, 22:47 | 36 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 13:33 | 36 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 22 November 2024 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s 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) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s 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 1 of 6 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 19 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (22 November 2024 – 19 July 2026) |
| Views total | 49 |
| Reactions total | 1 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 10 Aug 2026, 22:47 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 “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — 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 — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 10 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
4 reactions across 3 posts, in 3 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 2 | 50.0% | |
| ❤ | 1 | 25.0% | |
| 🔥 | 1 | 25.0% |
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 3 of the 20 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 4reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 22 November 2024 to 19 July 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.
Todo el mundo se pregunta si la IA es segura. Casi nadie se plantea la pregunta que realmente determina la respuesta: cuando un sistema de IA ejerce poder sobre nosotros, ¿quién tiene una obligación con nosotros? ¿Y cuál es esa obligación? Ahora mismo, la respuesta es nadie, y nada. Esa es la verdadera crisis, y es una crisis legal. Hemos construido todo nuestro debate sobre la responsabilidad de la IA sobre la bas…
Signed Ramon Quesada. † 🙏
Así pues, aquí está la afirmación, expresada claramente: Las entidades que ejercen control discrecional sobre sistemas de IA con consecuencias... Quienes establecen los objetivos, definen los incentivos, controlan las opciones predeterminadas y tienen derecho de veto, deben ser tratados como fiduciarios de las personas sobre las que actúan esos sistemas. No metafóricamente, sino desde un punto de vista doctrinal. Co…
❤1
Signed Ramon Quesada. † 🙏
https://x.com/i/status/2078514675881316764 https://t.me/S_Tominaga/5457
Signed Ramon Quesada. † 🙏
For years, the @Dr_CSWright account was managed by others in my name, including throughout the court case. That arrangement has now ended. I have taken direct ownership and control of the account and will be posting personally from this point forward. I accept no responsibility for anything posted here before I assumed control. I am not deleting the historical material; the past should occasionally be preserved, if …
Signed Ramon Quesada. † 🙏
Everyone is asking whether AI is safe. Almost no one is asking the question that actually determines the answer: when an AI system exercises power over you, who owes you a duty — and what is that duty? Right now the answer is nobody, and nothing. That is the real crisis, and it is a legal one. We have built our entire AI accountability conversation on the wrong word. We say "responsible AI," "trustworthy AI," "alig…
Signed Ramon Quesada. † 🙏
— that set the objectives, shape the incentives, own the defaults and hold the veto — should be treated as fiduciaries to the people those systems act upon. Not metaphorically. Doctrinally. With duties of loyalty and care, a prohibition on self-dealing against the interests of those they govern, and remedies that survive the sentence "the model did it." We do not need to invent this from nothing. Partnership law, fi…
Signed Ramon Quesada. † 🙏
https://x.com/truth_eater/status/674788036752879616?s=20
Signed @curvatia 🌙 ɐıʇɐʌɹnɔ ʕ•͡ᴥ•͡ʔ जेन्निफेर ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Τα πάντα Ρει
El efectivo está roto. No como dicen los banqueros, ni como pregonan los gobiernos sobre la «modernización» y la «transformación digital». El efectivo está roto porque se lo han robado a quienes lo usan, lo han despojado de su esencia y lo han enjaulado dentro de sistemas de permisos. La naturaleza del poder del cash o dinero en efectivo. Dr. Craig S. Wright agosto 2025 https://es.ramonquesada.com/espanol-es/la-na…
👍2
Signed Ramon Quesada.🇻🇪
¿Cuál es la única estructura de gobierno que garantiza la libertad haciendo imposible la acumulación de poder? No existe ninguna. Ese es el chiste. El poder no es algo que se "estructura" para que deje de existir, como un arquitecto que diseña una casa donde los lobos no pueden entrar. Los lobos viven dentro. Todo sistema, toda gran teoría de gobierno, todo noble intento de "equilibrar" la autoridad, todo termina d…
Signed Ramon Quesada.🇻🇪
El mundo se mueve como una rueda lenta y rechinante, indiferente a los escombros, a la sangre en el pavimento, a las cosas que se rompen y se doblan y no vuelven a encajar del todo como antes. No hay poesía en él, ninguna gran metáfora: solo un coche, un hombre y la desafortunada física de la colisión. Un momento, movimiento, luego una parada ensordecedora, luego el cuerpo que recuerda que es frágil. Un hombro fuera …
Signed Ramon Quesada.🇻🇪
Antes era sencillo: dinero en efectivo en la mano, unas monedas tintineando en el bolsillo y el mundo funcionaba con ello. Las tarjetas de crédito eran raras, una novedad para los ricos o los valientes. ¿Tarjetas de débito? No existían. Querías un café y lo pagabas. Ningún intermediario se llevaba una tajada del pastel, ninguna comisión se quitaba por el privilegio de pagar. Así funcionaba el mundo: directo, hone…
Signed Ramon Quesada.🇻🇪
BTC es un jardín cerrado, estancado y aterrorizado por todo lo que no pueda controlar. Está estancado en el pasado, aferrándose a la idea de que los bloques pequeños y restringidos y las fantasías fuera de la cadena como Lightning son suficientes para sostener un sistema global. Limitan el acceso, restringen el uso y lo llaman innovación. Pero lo único que están haciendo es cerrar la puerta al futuro real. BSV es lo…
Signed Ramon Quesada.🇻🇪
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @CSW_Espanol. 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 — 1,327,584 of 1,340,412entries 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.
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 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.
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 — 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 10 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“CSW 101* español” (@CSW_Espanol), 36 subscribers as measured 10 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/CSW_Espanol.
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.