Politics & activism — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Observations
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.
Views per post sit far above this size band
7,930 average views per post against 6,726 subscribers — an engagement rate of 117.9%. Across the 40,483 registered channels in the same cohort — 3,163–9,999 subscribers, posting mainly in Russian — the middle half sit between 7.15% and 26.5%, with a median of 14.2%.
What this was computed from
Window
30 days (13 July 2026 – 12 August 2026)
Posts measured
23 of 23 published in the window (0 exact, 23 rounded by Telegram)
Views totalled
182,460
Mature posts only
122.2% over 22 posts read at least 24h after publication
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal.A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 12 August 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.
Growth
4 measurements spanning 4 days, net +7. 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 6,715–6,747 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
9 Aug 2026, 17:42
6,726
-17
6 Aug 2026, 17:42
6,743
+24
6 Aug 2026, 03:18
6,719
no change
6 Aug 2026, 00:43
6,719
first reading
Engagement
25 posts held, back to 12 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 10 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
117.9%
avg views ÷ 6,726 subscribers
Avg views / post
7,930
23 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.65%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
23
of 25 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
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 August 2026
Posts held
25 (12 July 2026 – 11 August 2026)
Views total
182,460
Reactions total
3,009
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Aug 2026, 02:52 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.
What this channel posts
Photos
40
Videos
4
Links
433
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 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.
Reaction mix
3,380 reactions across 25 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 36.0% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
💯
1,218
36.0%
👍
666
19.7%
👎
448
13.3%
❤
243
7.19%
😁
230
6.80%
🔥
157
4.64%
😢
150
4.44%
🤔
149
4.41%
👏
36
1.07%
😐
24
0.71%
🤬
21
0.621%
🤯
12
0.355%
😱
9
0.266%
🤨
6
0.178%
👌
5
0.148%
🤩
4
0.118%
⚡
2
0.059%
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 25 of the 25 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 3,380reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 25 most recent posts we hold, published 12 July 2026 to 11 August 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 25 we hold a reading for · 4%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @DmitTar. 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 25 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 12 July 2026 to 11 August 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.
Знаете, что меня реально поражает? Что вменяемые, вроде люди пишут "у нас выборы". У кого, у вас то? "Выборы" у АП, а вы (сюрприз) марионетки. Впрочем, и участники-кандидаты тоже. Это называется здесь "активное и пассивное избирательное право". Другого нет, не завозили. Страна не "ваша". Чем больше вы с ней отождествляетесь, тем вам больнее. И тем, дальше вы от реальности.
Но как же, спросите, нам повлиять иначе на …
Чем громче сегодня молодые активисты кричали в поддержку Яблока, чем активнее они ранее высказывались за него в соцопросах, тем больше оснований они давали для снятия партии с "выборов". А вы думали как-то иначе все работает? А помните, вас учили громко кричать совершенно нелепый лозунг "мы здесь власть"? Вот, на самом деле, все претензии предъявляйте тем, кто убедил вас, что право на власть можно обосновывать просто…
Есть лозунг известный "Россия - страна возможностей". Но мы не вполне осознаем, каких. На самом деле, уникальных и тотальных. Возьмём пантеон великих людей в мировом масштабе. Среди них можно выделить совсем небольшую группу, чьи свершения и влияние были обусловлены, в первую очередь их личностными характеристиками, а не "историческими процессами".
Поясню. Например, Цезарь велик, но его "переход через Рубикон", его …
Сейчас проиллюстрирую на конкретном примере, в чем базисная проблема демократии. Когда право голоса даётся всем и каждому, по умолчанию считается, что все и каждый в состоянии, получив хотя бы среднее образование, адекватно понимать написанное или сказанное. Хотя бы, когда это написано или сказано прямо без метафор и наукообразных терминов. Теперь наглядный пример.
В предыдущем посте я ставлю, как мне казалось очень…
Послушал тут вчера разговор иноагента Венедиктова с иноагентом Пастуховым, и знаете ли, охренел. Первый спрашивает второго, как он относится с атомной бомбардировке Хиросимы. Строго говоря, странен даже сам вопрос. Но ответ - это просто саморазоблачение. Милый и интеллигентный человек говорит, что, мол он не верит в то, что войны можно вести по правилам, что на определенном этапе для победы допустимо любое, а "абстра…
В преддверии выборов вспомнил, как наблюдал за трансляцией конференции американских консерваторов. На ней тогда ещё только избранные Трамп и Вэнс выступили с благодарностями за поддержку. Но они могут её и лишиться, потому что тамошние консерваторы голосуют за ценности. А за личности, лишь в той степени, в какой они им соответствуют и способны их продвигать. И они (ценности) очень четко вырисовывались из выступлений …
Вспомнился фрагмент из записок исследователя конца XIX века:
«Я подъехал к Выгозерскому яму на 8-ми вёсельной лодке; невольно пришлось разговориться с гребцами о Петре, и мне захотелось испробовать, как отнесутся они к нему, ради провода войска загубившему здесь тысячи людей. “Много тут народу сгибло по его воле”, сказал я. — “Много! Ну, да и то сказать, кабы они не сгибли, так и дело такое никогда-бы не сделалось! …
Отечественные геополитики радовались приходу Трампа, поскольку, мол, он представитель политического реализма, а не эти все идеологизированные леволибералы. И он действительно реалист. И именно поэтому нелепо было ждать, что он признает "многополярность". Где полюс БРИКС? Где исламский полюс? Что они имеют предъявить? Что признавать то? Вот Китай полюс. Так он это и признает. И, именно исходя все из того же реализма (…
"Не ужасно ли и не обидно ли было бы думать, что Моисей восходил на Синай, что эллины строили свои изящные Акрополи, римляне вели пунические войны, что гениальный красавец Александр в пернатом каком-нибудь шлеме переходил Граник и бился под Арабеллами, что апостолы проповедовали, мученики страдали, поэты пели, живописцы писали и рыцари бились на турнирах для того только, чтобы французский или немецкий, или русский бу…
Вышла моя новая книга. Уже на всех ведущих сетевых площадках и в центральных магазинах. Она вот об этом:
"Поразительны судьбы некоторых высказываний. Исаак Ньютон писал одному из своих корреспондентов: «Если я и видел дальше, то лишь потому, что стоял на плечах гигантов». Ну что ж, великий человек изрек глубокую мысль—чего тут удивительного? Но, как выяснил известный социолог Роберт Мертон,—это мысль не его. Что ж,…
Есть помимо прямой пропаганды, гораздо более опасное подспудное отравление народного сознания. Один из ярких последних примеров популярная песня со всем известным припевом: "Матушка-земля, белая берёзонька
Для меня — Святая Русь, для других — занозонька".
Это откровенное программирование - березонька - Святая Русь - занозонька. Очень просто и очень тупо навязывается представление, что " Святая Русь" самим фактом сво…
А вот я не знаю, что страшнее, когда власть обманывают, допустим, по поводу "реалий на земле", или, когда идеологи уверяют её, что народные массы хлебом не корми, дай ощутить сопричастность к великому в форме соучастия. На самом деле, подавляющему большинству государственное величие приятно в чисто фоновом режиме. Если это большинство спросить готово ли оно пожертвовать ради него чем-то своим сугубо частным и личным,…
💯120❤5😢5👎3👍2👏2🤬1
Showing the 12 most recent of 25 posts we hold for @DmitTar. 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.
Polls
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
The shares total 108%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s 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 option’s 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 25 most recent posts we hold, published 12 July 2026 to 11 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 21,750 of 1,151,006entries 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.
Forward network
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.
Mentions
Named by 5 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.
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.
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 9 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Житель последних времен” (@DmitTar), 6,726 subscribers as measured 9 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/DmitTar.
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.
