Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for NGO Designing The Future

Channel

NGO Designing The Future

@DTFngo

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

44subscribers

-1 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001592217151
TypeChannel
Username@DTFngo
CreatedBetween 1 August 2021 and 28 February 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded10 August 2026
Last confirmed live19 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged2 times, most recently 19 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/DTFngo

Growth

444544.56 August 2026 — 45 subscribers10 August 2026 — 45 subscribers13 August 2026 — 44 subscribers6 August 202613 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 7 days, net -1. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 44–45 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
13 Aug 2026, 10:0744-1
10 Aug 2026, 14:4645no change
6 Aug 2026, 04:0545first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 2 August 2025the 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 · 30 days
59.1%
avg views ÷ 44 subscribers
Avg views / post
26.0
1 post measured
Reaction rate
this channel exposes no reaction counts
Posts in window
1
of 20 held

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.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 30 July 2026
Posts held20 (2 August 202530 July 2026)
Views total26
Reactions total
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken10 Aug 2026, 14:46 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.

Reaction mix

11 reactions across 7 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 27.3% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍327.3%
218.2%
218.2%
😢19.09%
😱19.09%
🤩19.09%
🥰19.09%

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 7 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 11reactions 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 2 August 2025 to 30 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.

Recent posts

8 Jun 2026, 12:32 UTC73 views2 reactionsread 10 August 2026
Photo

Jacque Fresco's 1970s lectures https://archive.org/search?tab=audio&query=creator%3A%22Jacque+Fresco%22&sort=title A Web Archive collection of lectures by Jacque Fresco from the 1970s. The timecodes can be found in the description of each clip.

2

3 May 2026, 09:47 UTC161 viewsread 10 August 2026

This is particularly absurd when compared to direct quotes from podcasts and primary sources, such as the leaked main document mentioned in the above post. Apart from accusing 'critics' of having questionable motives, no one has yet responded to the 'critique'.

3 May 2026, 09:38 UTC149 viewsread 10 August 2026
Photo

In April, "The Venus Project" worked hard to issue a statement of 'clarification' and revise its FAQ. The wording and references are very recognizable. It’s encouraging that people are asking the right questions and using the correct terminology. And I don’t think they’re naive enough to be swayed by such statements. As always, there’s no clarity or real meaning, just a lot of convoluted phrasing and pseudo-legal/ps

3 Apr 2026, 11:24 UTC118 views1 reactionsread 10 August 2026

The Thorium Network shared the main document that they had been working on with The Venus Project and Simon Michaux between 2022 and ~mid 2025. (This version is from 1 January 2024, Edit 5) From the main points: • It explicitly states that the Institute of Pseudoscientific Research "Promethean Nexus" is the central element and the primary reason for the city’s planning. And “unconventional energy sources” are defin

😢1

4 Feb 2026, 17:48 UTC131 views2 reactionsread 10 August 2026

📅 Event: Discussion group on Jacque Fresco & original The Venus Project (pre 2018) - biweekly I’m setting up a small, open discussion group for people interested in Jacque Fresco’s original ideas and The Venus Project (pre 2018). The goal is not promotion or ideology, but thoughtful discussion: – Fresco’s original concepts and sources – recent developments and news – critical analysis and fact-checking – movement s

1👍1

6 Dec 2025, 12:51 UTC113 viewsread 10 August 2026

“Old systems of the past are collapsing, and new systems of the future are still to be born. I call this moment the great progression.” 🌍 https://youtu.be/D0DUzZItVyI

21 Nov 2025, 14:16 UTC79 viewsread 10 August 2026

New financial reports from The Venus Project have been released In 2024, the two related nonprofit organizations — The Venus Project and the Jacque Fresco Foundation — spent a combined record $142.5k. For comparison: years ago, half of that amount was enough to produce the entire documentary “The Choice Is Ours” — including filming, equipment rental, interviews, post-production and all associated costs. The reports

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @DTFngo. 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

Citation-graph rank — 318,988 of 1,585,237entries 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.

Mentions

Named by 2 registered channels — 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.

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.

Cite this entry

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 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“NGO Designing The Future” (@DTFngo), 44 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/DTFngo.

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.