3 measurements spanning 16 days, net +1. 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 60–61 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
23 Aug 2026, 19:08
61
+1
10 Aug 2026, 05:01
60
no change
7 Aug 2026, 12:11
60
first reading
Engagement
19 posts held, back to 28 December 2025 — 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
29.5%
avg views ÷ 61 subscribers
Avg views / post
18.0
3 posts measured
Reaction rate
9.26%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
3
of 19 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 2 August 2026
Posts held
19 (28 December 2025 – 2 August 2026)
Views total
54
Reactions total
5
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
10 Aug 2026, 05:01 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
37 reactions across 16 posts, in 14 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 24.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🔥
9
24.3%
👍
8
21.6%
❤
4
10.8%
🎉
4
10.8%
😁
2
5.41%
🤓
2
5.41%
🍾
1
2.70%
👀
1
2.70%
👎
1
2.70%
💯
1
2.70%
🕊
1
2.70%
🗿
1
2.70%
😨
1
2.70%
🤷
1
2.70%
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 16 of the 19 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 37reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 28 December 2025 to 2 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
3
across the posts below
Posts paid on
3
of 19 we hold a reading for · 16%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @LeeSoft_Blog. 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 19 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 28 December 2025 to 2 August 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.
Advertising
Ad load
5.26%
1 of 19 posts carry an ad marker
Regulatory tokens
1
posts carrying an erid · 1 distinct token
Median views · ads
38.0
over 1 measured post
Median views · rest
48.0
over 18 measured posts
An ad marker, not a judgement about a post. A post is counted here because it carries one of two explicit markings: an erid token, which Russian law has required on paid placements since 2022 and which is issued against a specific advertising contract, or a #реклама / #ad hashtag in the body, which is the channel declaring it itself. The first is documentary; the second is a self-declaration and is weaker. No classifier reads the text and decides — nothing on this site guesses that a post is an advertisement.
This is a floor, and it can only ever be a floor.A channel that runs paid placements without marking them produces no marker for us to count, and an unmarked ad is indistinguishable from an ordinary post on the public surface. The ad load above therefore means “the share of posts that declared themselves”, never “the share of posts that were paid for”. A low figure is not evidence of a channel that runs few ads.
Both figures are medians, and no ratio between them is published. Each is a view reading that actually occurred on a post, picked by percentile_disc rather than averaged, so one viral post cannot move it and no interpolated value is invented between two readings. The sample on one side is under five posts, which is too thin to compare. The two figures are shown side by side with the count behind each, and deliberately not divided into a headline like “ads get x% fewer views” — an arithmetic that is easy to print and, at this sample size, means nothing.
Advertising tokens recorded on this entry
erid
Posts
First seen
Last seen
2VtzqxbuToo
1
3 July 2026
3 July 2026
A token repeated across several posts is one advertising contract placed more than once, which is what the identifier is for. The strings are reproduced exactly as they appeared in the post or in its click-through URL and are not validated against any registry — we record the marker a channel published, and whether it resolves to a real contract is a question for the register that issued it.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 28 December 2025 to 2 August 2026. Views are the latest single reading held for each post, and any reading at or above 1,000 is rounded by Telegram to three significant figures.
🎦 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbb6sZGOZ1A
⏱️ продолжительность: 27 минут и они того ой как стоят
— Да из заголовка к видосу же всё и так ясно, конечно же войны происходят только из-за того что кто-то реши ещё разок знатно подзаработать. Штаты ворвались, забрали нефть и сохранили статус сильнейшей экономики.
— Или нет?... 1️⃣ оцените свою уверенность по шкале от 0 до 10?
📔 заблуждения бывают разной сложности.
ла…
И вот что я вам скажу об этой возможно "легенде".
На всякий напомню что я вне этого лора. Так вот...
Это технодемка, не более.
Да, картинка ппц красивая.
Но механики и геймплей... за 6 лет VR ушёл далеко вперёд,
на столько вперёд, что она просто давит скукой.
Третья попытка и всё никак.
Уж простите, но я походу разбалован нормальным эффектом присутствия.
А для него именно картинка, сюрприз-сюрприз, весьма вторична…
📔 усиление интеллекта продать просто.
не сложно себе представить, что есть люди умнее тебя, а значит (если не вникать в терминологию) можно стать чуточку круче.
а вот с критическим мышлением так не получится.
все уверены что оно есть.
я весь могу хитро щурясь и надменно улыбаясь сомневаться в словах собеседника?
в плоскую землю не верю и в рептилоидов тоже.
в церковь всякую там не хожу, а просто верю без всех этих …
только сейчас клемануло что что-то не так с этим фактом...
> не нужен нам этот ваш трансгуманизм — в потомках наше бессмертие
оно и раньше было слабым аргументов, а теперь и вовсе контрольный.
ЗЫ.
хотя может это и есть тот самый слабый аргумент, просто я его подзабыл, а теперь только осознал.
или там таки было в контексте падения рождаемости после демографического перехода, не помню точно.
И немножко астрономии.
К теме теорий, гипотез, науковерия и научного метода.
Все мы помним про некую тёмную материю, которой больше по массе чем обычной материи, но при этом никто её никогда не видел.
Как и все очевидные вещи, этот факт просто известен и в доказательствах не нуждается.
А вдруг "... этот ваш Торричелли, ничего он не доказал, никого не убедил" (c) мем про плоскую Землю.
Коротко.
Если вы никогда не с…
Занятный факт про генетику, который я узнал буквально вчера.
Давно уже критикуют развлекательным момент генетических тестов вроде чей ты потомок, сколько в тебе крови избранного народа и т.п.
Строго говоря, тут стоит разделить на методы. В тех же гаплогруппах и в числе генов неандертальцев мы можем идти из генов прошлого в настоящее, но в вопросе именно родословных всё работает немного иначе.
1️⃣ итак "все мы прекр…
в любой непонянтой ситуации... повторяй когнитивные искажения.
🎦 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xHPEfosHAXM (22 минуты)
как бы база — данниг да крюгер, но с нюансами и подачей.
Про звёзды оч зашло
(подсматриваем только после ответа на 📊 опрос сообщением выше 👆🏻):
конечно же хочется ответить что звёзд.
нужно быть ппц летуном, чтобы осознавать размеры планеты.
плюс искажение городского жителя.
а космос он всегда по…
Спустя более чем полтора года у меня таки #Quest3
(Не путать с 3s, у которого только железо мощнее, в обвес от Q2, что как бы тоже не худший вариант, если критичен эконом).
Фидбек спустя полтора часа.
От фигни к вау:
✦ размеры.
✦ сам шлем не то чтобы сильно меньше, но по сути меньше. ну такое. шашечки.
✦ контроллеры без колец — это да. компактность, чтобы... что?
✦ звук — баса больше, высокие пропали куда-то
…
📔 Чтобы VR не умирал постоянно,
нужно ему найти какое-то эксклюзивное применение.
Нет, это не годится. Другое!
А то будет... и есть как биткоин — вроде штука дельная, но куда бы его пристроить?
Ну не метавселенные же навешивать, глупость какая!
И такая ниша есть. Телеприсутствие. Точнее удалённая работа.
Ну короче, напялили шлем и айда Маску на Марсе кирпичами колонию класть.
Ну ок, на Луне хотя бы для начала, пусть…
И ещё из паззла.
Новое поколение — лентяи и тупицы?!
А на самом деле с каждым годом выживать становится всё сложнее.
Проблема не в молодёжи, а в олдах — мы стреляем себе в колено.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4WbcRgaryY
Это давнишняя тема, но просто в этом видосе достаточно ёмко её раскрыли.
Алгоритмы нас разобщают?! Скайнет подкрался!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9mJP3LBpDqs
Упущенный мною важный элемент паззла.
P.S.
Ну вот ради чего вы здесь?
РПЖшечка, типа заумно, ВиаРчики, айтишечка, ЗОЖничество, ИИшечка, футурология?
Всё это нишевая фигня!
Нужно грести в модные: аниме, #BlackPink, #BTS, Тейлор Swift (ex-ObjectiveC).
Или к олдам в: ЗВ, Матрица, Друзья, Клиника.
Но сколько они ещё протянут? ;)
…
❤2💯1
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @LeeSoft_Blog. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
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 23 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“LeeSoft blog” (@LeeSoft_Blog), 61 subscribers as measured 23 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/LeeSoft_Blog.
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.