Other / unclassifiable — 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 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 69% 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.
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.
Content that also appears on other registered channels
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 1 other registered channel. This entry also forms a group of 2 channels linked by matching posts. 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.
No sample pairs were kept for this entry. The counts below were measured, but without the pairs there is nothing here for you to open and check, so treat the relationship as recorded rather than demonstrated.
Channels this entry shares post bodies with, where at least one matching post pair has no forward credit between the two channels, or to a common source, recorded in our data
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. 6 of the 6 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 106 comparable posts for this entry, running 5 August 2026 to 14 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.
Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).
Of the group of 2 channels, the one whose matching posts we hold earliest is @moralmedia. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the key clone_mutual, last confirmed 15 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.
Channels linked by matching posts
This channel is in a group of 2 registered channels linked by matching posts. Links are found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown in this list. “First” could only mean first in our own crawl, which depends on how deep we happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. Our one hand-check read 45 of the highest-confidence flagged pairs against the live Telegram pages. In 18 of them the live page showed a “Forwarded from” credit that our database had no record of, so reading that pair as an unattributed copy was wrong; the check did not measure who published first. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Near-verbatim matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
28 measurements spanning 100 days, net -247. 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 9,201–9,522 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 28
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
14 Nov 2026, 13:55
9,238
-11
9 Nov 2026, 15:09
9,249
-9
6 Nov 2026, 03:06
9,258
+1
3 Nov 2026, 08:09
9,257
-3
31 Oct 2026, 02:50
9,260
-13
28 Oct 2026, 03:01
9,273
-12
24 Oct 2026, 17:06
9,285
-5
21 Oct 2026, 11:15
9,290
-10
18 Oct 2026, 05:01
9,300
-5
15 Oct 2026, 07:56
9,305
-5
11 Oct 2026, 21:02
9,310
-21
5 Oct 2026, 13:54
9,331
-16
27 Sept 2026, 13:57
9,347
-12
18 Sept 2026, 04:19
9,359
-5
14 Sept 2026, 05:01
9,364
-12
10 Sept 2026, 14:17
9,376
-25
5 Sept 2026, 12:39
9,401
-17
1 Sept 2026, 04:37
9,418
-10
29 Aug 2026, 01:43
9,428
-14
26 Aug 2026, 04:05
9,442
first reading
Engagement
236 posts held, back to 5 August 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 58 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
6.47%
avg views ÷ 9,238 subscribers
Avg views / post
598
37 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.99%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
73
of 236 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 15 November 2026
Posts held
236 (5 August 2026 – 15 November 2026)
Views total
22,114
Reactions total
662
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
15 Nov 2026, 12:59 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
≈9,670
Videos
≈7,020
Links
≈7,750
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 15 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.
Video runtime
2h 34m
Average length
1m 57s
Measured directly from 79 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.
Reaction mix
2,065 reactions across 119 posts, in 36 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 22.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
468
22.7%
❤
412
20.0%
🙏
202
9.78%
🔥
173
8.38%
💯
154
7.46%
🤬
107
5.18%
🏆
95
4.60%
😈
68
3.29%
⚡
66
3.20%
😡
61
2.95%
🕊
38
1.84%
🫡
37
1.79%
🙈
34
1.65%
😱
27
1.31%
👏
24
1.16%
💔
11
0.533%
🙉
11
0.533%
🤯
11
0.533%
😨
10
0.484%
😁
8
0.387%
16 further kinds
48
2.32%
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 119 of the 236 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 2,065 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 236 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 15 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
3
across the posts below
Posts paid on
3
of 119 we hold a reading for · 3%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @EarthJusticeLeague_DataLibrary. 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 236 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 5 August 2026 to 15 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 3 of 73 posts held from the last 30 days (4.11%) 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).
💥盧比奧：誰真正決定一個國家的長遠方向｜絕不向「沒靈魂的全球主義官僚」與激進法官低頭｜守護國家主權、制度權力、對抗「全球治理、國際法武器化」💢
11月13日晚上，國務卿馬可·盧比奧(#MarcoRubio)在華盛頓聯邦黨人學會「全國律師大會」上，發表第25屆芭芭拉·K·奧爾森紀念講座(Barbara K. Olson Memorial Lecture)演講。這是他在共和黨中期選舉失利後的首場公開演說，地點選在保守派法律界聚集的場合，內容聚焦「制度權力、國際法武器化、與國家主權」。
🔔中期選舉失利後，盧比奧沒有把焦點放在選票數字，而是把問題拉回更根本的層面：「誰真正決定一個國家的長期方向。」
🔔他指出，選票只能決定一屆的掌權者，卻無法自動改變「大學裡教什麼、律師如何思考、媒體如何定義『何謂正常』、非營利組織和企業如何塑造公共認知」❕
🔔真正的權力散落在這些「制度場域」裡，左派過去幾十年來，比右派更清楚這點，所以他們不需要每…
Showing the 12 most recent of 236 posts we hold for @EarthJusticeLeague_DataLibrary. 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.
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.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
🥗 视讯快报~密接巨变时代 @shixun160 · 22,693 Telegram ranks this channel #11 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 19 September 2026
俄罗斯资讯参考频道 @JShangrong · 24,077 Telegram ranks this channel #38 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 15 September 2026
Post Vaksin Fenomena Malaysia 🇲🇾🍁🍁 @PostVaksinFenomenaMalaysia · 29,950 Telegram ranks this channel #52 of 67 here — alongside 66 others — read 6 September 2026
This channel appears in 3 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 14 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“地球正義聯盟～資料館” (@EarthJusticeLeague_DataLibrary), 9,238 subscribers as measured 14 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/EarthJusticeLeague_DataLibrary.
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.
