Looks pepe 2.0 , Lets send it

Channel
God Father Gems
@GodFatherGems
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
675subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1001671556939 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @GodFatherGems |
| Created | Between 1 December 2021 and 31 March 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 7 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 7 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/GodFatherGems |
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Aug 2026, 07:50 | 675 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 07:31 | 675 | first reading |
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 12 May 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 · 30 days
- 9.00%
- avg views ÷ 675 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 60.8
- 8 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- 0.714%
- reactions ÷ views · ER floor
- Posts in window
- 8
- 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. It is computed over the 1 of 8 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (12 May 2026 – 6 August 2026) |
| Views total | 486 |
| Reactions total | 1 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 07:31 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
5 reactions across 5 posts, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 5 | 100.0% |
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 5 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 5reactions 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 12 May 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.
Recent posts
MISSED $CASHCAT ? HERE IS YOUR SECOND CHANCE! CASHCAT 2.0 DIAMOND HANDS ONLY! 💎 Chart : 0x150228e517b1f0ca7feca76f42da070797065ec5 Web: https://cashcat2.cc X: https://x.com/cashcat2token Tg:https://t.me/Cashcat2Portal
Video, posted without a caption
RATO TEAM BEHIND , LFG
Another on-chain find, still pretty micro low cap and rumors is that some people on team had a massive runner back then (8-fig+). Meme is based on the only Elon Musk's list on X. https://dexscreener.com/robinhood/0xa136e0c5f91d18b8178f3565ea4da9ed743f45cb5da801b469267234fdd598fd https://t.me/monkeysRH
Rexa - The Future of Robinhood The future launchpad is coming to Robinhood. Trenches never looked so good. Launch. Trade. Easily. if u see this you’re early, founder last project over 200 Millions mcap. Robinhood Chain is getting number #1. Now it needs its legends 👀 Site: https://rexa.club X: https://x.com/rexadotclub Tg: https://t.me/RexaCLUBRH
Good morning all, its time to printing 1000x
Known scammers, be careful with this guy account @oxleytrades scammed so many people’s on Robinhood chain. I’ll kill him when i meet with this guy. This tg : @oxleytrades Channels: https://t.me/oxleytrenches
❤1
Nice move up 4x, next update 100x
Bought a bag here, its will be going higher I love $AMERICAonchain https://dexscreener.com/robinhood/0xb8F373eB3F38125729c3b124cb6B907D65A5b945
$NYANCAT maybe prepping a dirty move, buyers and sellers having a polite slap fight, and moon mode activated, prepare for nosebleeds mcap's sitting around 10.3K, https://t.me/NYANCAT_ONROBINHOOD https://dexscreener.com/robinhood/0xfac2fa42a79caa40d95643e8b0beb089051f23e7 Trade it fast with: Banana | Maestro | Axiom | GmGn
$TRUMP maybe prepping a dirty move, mcap's sitting around 17.4K, market waiting for a villain, and moon mode activated, prepare for nosebleeds https://dexscreener.com/robinhood/0x71c836c8c703658f998144390b50e85d002ac90f Trade it fast with: Banana | Maestro | Axiom | GmGn
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @GodFatherGems. 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 — 968,648 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.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
@BananaGunSniper_bot · 38,6582 postsCashcat 2.0 Portal
@Cashcat2Portal · 151 postNyan Cat Portal
@NYANCAT_ONROBINHOOD · 111 postOxley’s Journal📓
@oxleytrenches · 8911 postRexa - Portal
@RexaCLUBRH · 501 posttheclarityact
@theclarityact · 171 postWatcher Guru
@WatcherGuru · 627,0831 post
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 7 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“God Father Gems” (@GodFatherGems), 675 subscribers as measured 7 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/GodFatherGems.
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.