Video, posted without a caption
✍492🗿26
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)

Channel
@CoIdGamble
On this record: Topic · Observations · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Posts edited after publishing · Posts recorded as deleted · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
41,370subscribers
+4,894 since we began measuring on 11 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 31,623–100,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002680921909 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @CoIdGamble |
| Description | NFA. Narrative breakdowns videos and project explainers comes with partnerships. For colllab: @forthegadamnbechees |
| Created | Between 1 March 2025 and 31 July 2025 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 11 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 11 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 60 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 11 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/CoIdGamble |
Crypto & trading — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 99% confidence. This is a model’s 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 — 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.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 2 other registered channels. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @marcellcooks/1821116 Aug 2026, 14:33 UTC | @CoIdGamble/2851 · this entry16 Aug 2026, 14:54 UTC | 1.00 | 21 minutes |
| @marcellcooks/2131511 Sept 2026, 23:57 UTC | @CoIdGamble/3021 · this entry11 Sept 2026, 23:58 UTC | 1.00 | 72 seconds |
| @marcellcooks/222442 Oct 2026, 15:17 UTC | @CoIdGamble/3131 · this entry2 Oct 2026, 18:16 UTC | 1.00 | 3.0 hours |
| @marcellcooks/222674 Oct 2026, 00:20 UTC | @CoIdGamble/3139 · this entry4 Oct 2026, 00:20 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @marcellcooks/223206 Oct 2026, 23:57 UTC | @CoIdGamble/3145 · this entry6 Oct 2026, 23:59 UTC | 1.00 | 2 minutes |
| @marcellcooks/2239311 Oct 2026, 16:44 UTC | @CoIdGamble/3152 · this entry11 Oct 2026, 16:47 UTC | 1.00 | 2 minutes |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @marcellcooks | 9 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 2 minutes | @marcellcooks (9–0) |
| @Davecall1 | 5 (5/5 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 33 minutes | @Davecall1 (4–1) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. 13 of the 13 matches recorded here fall after that date and carried no header when we read them. The rest predate reliable capture and are not evidence either way.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 155 comparable posts for this entry, running 24 July 2026 to 10 November 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Recorded under the key clone_copy, last confirmed 11 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 11 Nov 2026, 22:17 | 41,370 | -14 |
| 9 Nov 2026, 23:40 | 41,384 | -9 |
| 8 Nov 2026, 16:10 | 41,393 | -17 |
| 7 Nov 2026, 08:17 | 41,410 | -12 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 05:37 | 41,422 | -9 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 04:29 | 41,431 | -3 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 05:55 | 41,434 | +2,071 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 02:16 | 39,363 | +9,729 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 05:40 | 29,634 | +204 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 02:47 | 29,430 | -11 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 04:29 | 29,441 | -3,093 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 07:15 | 32,534 | -5,363 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 07:50 | 37,897 | -7,002 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 08:29 | 44,899 | -1,155 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 05:27 | 46,054 | -10 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 05:31 | 46,064 | -14 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 06:16 | 46,078 | +3,201 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 03:40 | 42,877 | -12 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 02:16 | 42,889 | -13 |
| 21 Oct 2026, 23:41 | 42,902 | first reading |
293 posts held, back to 24 July 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 188 pages of 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 10 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 293 (24 July 2026 – 10 November 2026) |
| Views total | 311,110 |
| Reactions total | 17,359 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Nov 2026, 12:45 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 12 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Measured directly from 8 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s 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 Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
157,035 reactions across 293 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 52.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ✍ | 82,027 | 52.2% | |
| 🗿 | 75,008 | 47.8% |
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 293 of the 293 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 157,035 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 293 most recent posts we hold, published 24 July 2026 to 10 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @CoIdGamble. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 293 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 24 July 2026 to 10 November 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 1 of 28 posts held from the last 30 days (3.57%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — 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).
Video, posted without a caption
✍492🗿26
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)
New milestones are in sight 🎉 Nullmask protocol has processed nearly $140M in private transaction flow since October 1st.
✍463🗿180
Signed Ice
https://x.com/bscnews/status/2119320765745270943?a=HyJTAvlViKcNH29fj_Y&s=46 this is an interesting expansion for Nullmask, bringing privacy infrastructure to Monad opens another door for the ecosystem. users shouldn’t have to sacrifice confidentiality just to interact with a high-performance blockchain. privacy is becoming an important part of the infrastructure, not just another narrative to chase. good to see N…
✍410🗿201
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)
You all wondering why I haven’t posted any low cap projects, Had 4 low cap projects come to me within the space of yesterday and today. 2 of them we couldn’t agree on good terms. Another one I’m still considering, but the dev hasn’t been active, I finally agreed to one, but I was still skeptical. Before pushing it to my public channel, I let 2 of my whales take a look and ape from the cabal chart first, We got in aro…
✍519🗿202
Signed Ice
Gonna start posting more mid cap plays and a few low caps too. Any long-term partnerships I lock in, I’ll let the channel know ahead of time so everyone can position themselves and be ready for the milli pushes.
✍472🗿43
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)
Most people talk about blockchain transparency. But very few talk about what that transparency means for individual privacy. Every transaction leaves a trail. Wallet activity, amounts and transaction history can be inspected on-chain. So how do you approach privacy without making the entire blockchain disappear? We took a closer look at Nullmask, its shared-pool concept and how it aims to make direct transaction …
✍516🗿85
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)
The Binance situation is another reminder of something people in this space keep overlooking. Everyone talks about mass adoption, billions in volume, institutions coming in and crypto becoming the future of finance. But what happens when people can’t trust the platforms holding their money? Security, custody and transparency should be the bare minimum, not something we start discussing after a major incident. Cry…
✍454🗿105
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)
@forthegaddamnbechees New collab account fam, all pending dms pls should be forwarded here
✍425🗿96
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)
Lots of scam devs out there lol, last night @forthegaddamnbitcheees account got hacked, a dev of a coin named rizzmass dmed ice and asked for promo and sent him all his link(dex, x, tg) but unknown to ice the safeguard bot was a fake clone which made the scammmer had access to his account yesterday night (10pm uk time) and logged him out and atp can't even blame ice cause he isn't used to joining groups apparently, w…
✍938🗿207
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)
https://x.com/nullmaskio/status/2114817882748338377?s=46 i promise you think its a multi 9 figure coin it flips stonk soon and sends like crazy
✍1,220🗿206
Signed Ice
https://x.com/NullMaskio/status/2114753257272913971?s=20 i might deposit 10m and fucking rape the chart to 100m myself this is legit insane $mask looking golden
✍716🗿204
Signed Cold (永远不要先发私信。)
Video, posted without a caption
🗿501✍110
Signed Ice
Showing the 12 most recent of 293 posts we hold for @CoIdGamble. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
@CoIdGamble edited 1 post after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
We recorded 17 posts on @CoIdGamble as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
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.
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.
@CoIdGamble named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — 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 — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — 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 11 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“ICEMAN COOKS” (@CoIdGamble), 41,370 subscribers as measured 11 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/CoIdGamble.
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.