Channel
@ECReCurrency
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
2,412subscribers
-4 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1003316227026 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @ECReCurrency |
| Created | Between 1 November 2025 and 31 March 2026— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 15 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/ECReCurrency |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Aug 2026, 04:56 | 2,412 | -4 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 20:17 | 2,416 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 19:29 | 2,416 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 2 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 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (2 July 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 18,310 |
| Reactions total | 382 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 20:17 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.
897 reactions across 19 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 33.9% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 304 | 33.9% | |
| 👍 | 262 | 29.2% | |
| ❤ | 251 | 28.0% | |
| 👏 | 37 | 4.12% | |
| 🏆 | 17 | 1.90% | |
| 👌 | 10 | 1.11% | |
| 🤔 | 7 | 0.78% | |
| 🫡 | 3 | 0.334% | |
| ❤🔥 | 2 | 0.223% | |
| 🤩 | 2 | 0.223% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 0.111% | |
| 😱 | 1 | 0.111% |
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 19 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 897reactions 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 July 2026 to 7 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.
🔐 Many blockchains fund validator security by issuing new coins on a schedule. That dilutes existing holders whether they notice it or not. eCurrency's validator rewards come from transaction fees, routed through a shared Reward Fund and paid out block by block. There's no emission schedule underneath, so security scales with actual network usage instead of a fixed printing rate. The practical effect: supply stays …
🔥12👍11❤7
⚡ Why UTXO fits payments better than account models Most blockchains process transactions sequentially. Every transfer touches a global account state, so the chain validates them one at a time. That caps how much volume the network can move. eCurrency runs UTXO-native architecture. Transactions that don't spend the same outputs are independent, so they validate in parallel instead of queuing behind each other. Pay…
👍19🔥15❤8
📰 A news site could charge £0.10 to read one article. Card fees make that impossible, so readers get a £12 monthly subscription instead, whether they read 1 article or 30 that month. → Card rails set that price floor, and publishers built around it. → It's not a content problem. It's an infrastructure limit that shaped an entire industry's pricing model. → Micropayments need a settlement layer where £0.10 doesn't ge…
❤19👍10🔥8❤🔥2
🤖 AI agents are starting to pay for things on their own, booking flights, buying compute, subscribing to a data feed mid task. → We're curious what people would hold back. What's the one thing you'd never let an agent pay for without you watching?
❤16🔥12🤔5😱1
🔐 Swapping the signature scheme on a live network means a hard fork. Every existing address needs re-securing under the new scheme. That work has to start before large-scale quantum computers exist, not after they're already a threat. eCurrency uses Falcon, the NIST-selected post-quantum signature scheme, built into the protocol from the start. More about eCurrency: Whitepaper | Web | X
🔥32👍24❤12👏2
🐛 On eCurrency, contract logic runs client-side instead of across the whole network. Each party validates their own execution rather than every node running the same code in lockstep. That matters for how bugs behave. On a shared-execution chain, a flaw in one contract can cascade, since every node runs the same logic against the same state. On eCurrency, execution stays local to the parties involved. A bug in one c…
❤26👍15🔥4⚡1
🤖 Software is starting to spend money without a person clicking approve. Booking a service, calling a paid API, renting compute by the minute. Card rails were built around a person authorizing each individual charge, and that assumption doesn't hold once the buyer is a machine. That's the gap client-side, programmable payment logic is built to close. More about eCurrency: Whitepaper | Web | X
❤17👍10🔥9
🧱 eCurrency's base layer is a UTXO ledger, built to settle value. That choice runs through the whole stack. Blocks confirm every 10 seconds. Contract logic executes on the client side, so the network verifies outcomes without running the code itself. Validators earn from transaction fees through the Reward Fund. This is what the protocol was designed around from the start. More about eCurrency: Whitepaper | Web |
👍18❤11🔥8
🔒 Why eCurrency validators never get slashed Most Proof-of-Stake networks lock validator capital and punish bad behavior by burning part of it. eCurrency doesn't use either mechanism. → No bonding period. Hold ECR, run a node, participate in consensus. → Rewards come from transaction fees, not inflation, so validator income moves with real network usage instead of diluting the supply. → No locked stake means nothing…
❤24👍14🔥10
🖥 Our desktop wallet is live. Linux and macOS builds are available now, with Windows coming soon. It's non-custodial, so your keys stay on your device, and it connects straight to the network instead of routing through a hosted service. Staking works on the same terms as the rest of eCurrency: no lockups, no slashing, full liquidity the whole time you're earning. Download here https://ecurrency.org/wallets
🔥38❤16👍10🏆7🤩2
🔐 Most crypto signatures in use today won't survive a working quantum computer. That's not news, but the timeline keeps getting shorter than people plan for. Falcon, the scheme NIST selected through its post-quantum standardization process, runs about 666 bytes per signature. The general-purpose alternative most other chains would default to runs closer to 2,400 bytes. eCurrency signs with Falcon from the base layer…
❤21👍11🔥10
Most currencies inflate because someone decides that's the right lever to pull. eCurrency's supply isn't adjustable like that. It's fixed at the protocol level, not by a policy that can change with circumstance. More about eCurrency: Whitepaper | Web | X
👍27🔥19🏆10👌3
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @ECReCurrency. 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 — 338,846 of 1,480,944entries 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.
Named by 4 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 15 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“eCurrency Official Channel” (@ECReCurrency), 2,412 subscribers as measured 15 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ECReCurrency.
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.