Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for JESUSisLORD Validator

Channel

JESUSisLORD Validator

@JESUSisLORDValidator

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

787subscribers

+4 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-1001711152287
TypeChannel
Username@JESUSisLORDValidator
CreatedBetween 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live16 August 2026
Measurements held4
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 16 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/JESUSisLORDValidator

Growth

7837877857 August 2026 — 783 subscribers7 August 2026 — 783 subscribers7 August 2026 — 784 subscribers16 August 2026 — 787 subscribers7 August 202616 August 2026
4 measurements spanning 9 days, net +4. 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 782–788 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
16 Aug 2026, 03:26787+3
7 Aug 2026, 20:52784+1
7 Aug 2026, 09:17783no change
7 Aug 2026, 08:55783first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 22 November 2025the 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
40.8%
avg views ÷ 787 subscribers
Avg views / post
321
5 posts measured
Reaction rate
9.85%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
5
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.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 5 August 2026
Posts held20 (22 November 20255 August 2026)
Views total1,604
Reactions total158
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken7 Aug 2026, 09:17 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.

Reaction mix

746 reactions across 20 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 59.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍44659.8%
20327.2%
🔥263.49%
🎉182.41%
🕊152.01%
🙏141.88%
💯121.61%
👀30.402%
👏30.402%
🥰30.402%
😎20.268%
🐳10.134%

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 746reactions 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 22 November 2025 to 5 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

5 Aug 2026, 13:03 UTC191 views17 reactionsread 7 August 2026

https://x.com/ForTheCross_CH/status/2084985370924679599

👍17

5 Aug 2026, 13:03 UTC191 views12 reactionsread 7 August 2026

https://x.com/ForTheCross_CH/status/2084974003870216534

👍12

2 Aug 2026, 12:26 UTC361 views37 reactionsread 7 August 2026

https://x.com/ForTheCross_CH/status/2083891250508206492

22🔥8👍4🙏3

2 Aug 2026, 11:54 UTC341 views53 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Thank you everyone who supported my validators and the 1.5% tax proposal. The proposal passed and has been officially implemented on-chain. Praise God! 🙏

27👍12🎉10🔥4

27 Jul 2026, 12:22 UTC520 views39 reactionsread 7 August 2026

I have voted yes on LUNC governance proposal #12223, which a community member brought to vote to try to implement the 1.5% on-chain tax.

👍295🙏3🎉1🐳1

28 Jun 2026, 05:22 UTC802 views43 reactionsread 7 August 2026

I have voted no on LUNC proposal #12222 which is for funding to set-up Hyperlane, which would allow wrapped LUNC to be traded on other chains. I was not in support of the original proposal, as I don't support making fake LUNC on other chains. Also note there is a false validator low on the list with the name JESUSisLORD 3, which is not my validator.

👍374🙏2

2 May 2026, 00:06 UTC≈1,250 views35 reactionsread 7 August 2026

I have voted yes for LUNC proposal #12221, which is a further chain upgrade from Orbit Labs to fix some issues which came up from the recent upgrade to Cosmos SDK 53.

👍2010🎉5

19 Apr 2026, 08:51 UTC≈1,440 views40 reactionsread 7 August 2026

I have voted no on LUNC governance proposal #12219 for a USTC staking system. This proposal says that there will be no minting (unlike the one that came recently), but it still has the issue of when Vegas brought this proposal earlier, that there is no suitable source of funding for staking rewards for USTC. We already need to focus on improving LUNC staking APR, we don't also need a seperate staking system for USTC

👍289🕊2👀1

9 Apr 2026, 12:34 UTC≈1,360 views45 reactionsread 7 August 2026

I have voted yes for LUNC governance proposal #12218 for the chain upgrade to Cosmos SDK 53 by Orbit Labs. This has been long in the works and the chain halt and upgrade will take place around 17 April.

👍3312

3 Apr 2026, 08:58 UTC≈1,400 views67 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Thank the Lord our God Jesus Christ for His great salvation! God bless you all my brothers and sisters in Christ. I hope you are doing well. Christopher.

51🕊6🙏6🔥2🥰2

27 Mar 2026, 09:17 UTC≈1,520 views43 reactionsread 7 August 2026

I have voted no with veto on proposal #12216. This is a proposal by Vegas for a USTC staking system, a proposal I voted against earlier for reasons including that there is no suitable funding source. This has not changed, but now Vegas is proposing we should mint USTC for 10% APR staking rewards, taking USTC from deflationary to inflationary. I am opposed to minting LUNC or USTC, and see any efforts towards minting U

24👍14💯4🥰1

15 Feb 2026, 00:11 UTC≈1,560 views41 reactionsread 7 August 2026

I have voted no with veto on proposal #12215, which proposes to adjust the tax split and lower burns from 0.4% to 0.1%, and increase funding to the community pool and oracle pool. I am firmly opposed to reducing burns and I support raising the burn tax.

👍28💯75🕊1

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @JESUSisLORDValidator. 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.

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.

Baby Doge 공지사항
@BabyDogeAnnKO · 88,603
Telegram ranks this channel #71 of 75 here — alongside 74 others — read 17 August 2026
Anuncios Baby Doge
@BabyDogeAnnES · 89,504
Telegram ranks this channel #73 of 74 here — alongside 73 others — read 17 August 2026

This channel appears in 2 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 16 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“JESUSisLORD Validator” (@JESUSisLORDValidator), 787 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/JESUSisLORDValidator.

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.