NO ACTIVITY NO POSTS
custom 5303360582706015886105

Channel
@DoYouKnowMrX
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
8,073subscribers
-83 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002322172756 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @DoYouKnowMrX |
| Description | DO YOU KNOW MR X? |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/DoYouKnowMrX |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 07:52 | 8,073 | -31 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 12:31 | 8,104 | -51 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 18:44 | 8,155 | -1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 16:40 | 8,156 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 16:39 | 8,156 | first reading |
20 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 12 pagesof 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 6 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (24 July 2026 – 6 August 2026) |
| Views total | 64,130 |
| Reactions total | 2,258 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Aug 2026, 16:47 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 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.
2,258 reactions across 20 posts, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| custom 5303360582706015886 | 2,258 | 100.0% |
Custom emoji. One row above is a Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — 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 isTelegram’s.
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 20 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 2,258reactions 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 24 July 2026 to 6 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.
NO ACTIVITY NO POSTS
custom 5303360582706015886105
After the Snowden disclosures, pressure mounted on the FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE SURVEILLANCE COURT. For decades the court had operated almost entirely in secret, hearing only from the government. In 2015 the USA FREEDOM ACT created a formal mechanism for the court to appoint independent advocates — amici curiae — in cases that presented novel or significant interpretations of law, particularly those affecting privacy and…
custom 530336058270601588689
In April 2024, Congress passed and President Biden signed the REFORM AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2024. It extended SECTION 702 until April 19, 2026. The public was told this was the moment of meaningful correction after years of documented problems inside the FBI’s use of the database. The most visible changes focused on how the FBI may query data already collected under Section 702 when the query involves a U.S. per…
custom 530336058270601588673
SECTION 702 did not appear in the original PATRIOT ACT. It came later, in 2008, through the FISA Amendments Act. The public was told it was a necessary tool to target foreign terrorists and spies located outside the United States. Collection would occur with the compelled assistance of American electronic service providers. No individual warrant would be required for the foreign target. That was the surface story. …
custom 530336058270601588669
After the PATRIOT ACT expanded the architecture in 2001, the public eventually saw part of what had been built. In June 2013 Edward Snowden released documents showing that SECTION 215 had been used for the bulk collection of domestic telephone metadata. The surface story of “targeted tools against foreign terrorists” collided with the operational reality. Pressure followed. The same authorities that had been granted…
custom 530336058270601588671
Most of you were told the PATRIOT ACT was written to protect you. On September 11, 2001 the attacks created a window of pure fear. Within days the machinery was already moving. By October 26, only forty-five days later, President Bush signed the bill into law. The public was told this was about stopping foreign terrorists. That was the surface story. The authorities written into that law went far beyond the narrow …
custom 530336058270601588686
ROUND 2
custom 5303360582706015886135
SHALL I CONTINUE?
custom 5303360582706015886228
THE RESOLUTION OF 2008 AND THE RESPONSE OF 2020 The CRISIS OF 2008 is usually remembered for the collapse. The more important part is how it was resolved. When the system seized, the response was swift and hierarchical. Institutions judged critical to the core were protected, recapitalized, or absorbed under official pressure. Balance sheets that would have failed under ordinary market conditions were supported by …
custom 5303360582706015886142
1998–1999: LTCM AND THE END OF GLASS-STEAGALL In the space of roughly FIFTEEN MONTHS the system revealed its direction with unusual clarity. First came LONG-TERM CAPITAL MANAGEMENT. In the autumn of 1998 the fund’s extreme LEVERAGE and concentrated positions brought it to the edge of failure. The RUSSIAN DEFAULT and the sudden breakdown of historical price relationships turned its models against it. Losses escalat…
custom 530336058270601588691
1987 AND THE BIRTH OF THE FED PUT On OCTOBER 19, 1987, the DOW JONES INDUSTRIAL AVERAGE fell 22.6 PERCENT in a single session. It remains the largest one-day percentage decline in the history of the index. Billions in paper wealth disappeared within hours. PORTFOLIO INSURANCE STRATEGIES, PROGRAM TRADING, and a market that had risen too far without correction all played their part. The public was told the crash was …
custom 530336058270601588698
VOLCKER SHOCK — 1979 TO 1982 By the end of the 1970s the INFLATION that had been building since the early part of the decade could no longer be managed with words or temporary controls. In August 1979 PAUL VOLCKER was appointed CHAIRMAN OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE. Within months the policy changed. INTEREST RATES were driven to levels the post-war generation had never experienced. The FEDERAL FUNDS RATE rose above 19 PE…
custom 5303360582706015886100
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @DoYouKnowMrX. 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 — 202,335 of 1,160,990entries 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.
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.
Named by 3 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.
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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“X” (@DoYouKnowMrX), 8,073 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/DoYouKnowMrX.
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.