Personal blog — 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 56% 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.
Growth
27 measurements spanning 96 days, net -939. 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 7,515–9,101 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 27
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
10 Nov 2026, 23:59
7,698
-265
6 Nov 2026, 23:37
7,963
-398
3 Nov 2026, 22:39
8,361
-239
1 Nov 2026, 05:10
8,600
-114
29 Oct 2026, 12:28
8,714
+304
26 Oct 2026, 09:09
8,410
-220
22 Oct 2026, 23:07
8,630
-107
19 Oct 2026, 20:40
8,737
+157
17 Oct 2026, 04:30
8,580
+275
14 Oct 2026, 13:49
8,305
-185
11 Oct 2026, 11:22
8,490
-141
5 Oct 2026, 03:17
8,631
+66
26 Sept 2026, 05:16
8,565
+145
17 Sept 2026, 06:55
8,420
-34
13 Sept 2026, 10:00
8,454
-90
9 Sept 2026, 20:16
8,544
-5
4 Sept 2026, 08:16
8,549
-331
31 Aug 2026, 15:08
8,880
+125
28 Aug 2026, 13:05
8,755
-13
25 Aug 2026, 20:34
8,768
first reading
Engagement
62 posts held, back to 13 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 46 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
13.3%
avg views ÷ 7,698 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,020
18 posts measured
Reaction rate
8.12%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
18
of 62 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 17 of 18 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 9 November 2026
Posts held
62 (13 July 2026 – 9 November 2026)
Views total
18,402
Reactions total
1,426
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Nov 2026, 02:36 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
178
Videos
27
Links
104
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
Video runtime
5m 40s
Average length
1m 53s
Measured directly from 3 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
3,768 reactions across 60 posts, in 19 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 52.8% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
1,988
52.8%
🔥
771
20.5%
👍
653
17.3%
💯
99
2.63%
👏
78
2.07%
❤🔥
68
1.80%
🎉
38
1.01%
🥰
17
0.451%
👌
16
0.425%
🤩
10
0.265%
🙏
8
0.212%
💘
5
0.133%
😁
4
0.106%
🤔
4
0.106%
😍
3
0.08%
😢
2
0.053%
🦄
2
0.053%
💔
1
0.027%
🤮
1
0.027%
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 60 of the 62 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 3,768 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 62 most recent posts we hold, published 13 July 2026 to 9 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 2 of 18 posts held from the last 30 days (11.1%) 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).
Сегодня отмечается Всемирный день сирот. Я уже писала, что являюсь попечителем благотворительного фонда “Найди семью”, который к этой проблеме имеет прямое отношение. Мне очень близка концепция помощи фонда: она как раз создает те самые системные позитивные изменения в жизнях тысяч детей. А не просто помогает разрозненным единицам.
Ребенок, потерявший кровную семью, начинает свою жизнь в условиях жесточайшего дефицит…
The shares total 146%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Сколько капель воды поместится на 10 копеечную монету, если капать из пипетки? Загадайте число, прежде чем читать дальше.
На программе Future Readiness мы сделали такой эксперимент. Сначала каждый записал свой прогноз, и почти все уложились в скромные пять–десять капель. Потом начали капать, и вода собралась в такой высокий купол, что прогнозы оказались занижены в несколько раз. Победитель накапал 57 капель! Монет…
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Больше двух тысяч лет назад древнегреческий поэт Архилох написал: «Лиса знает много вещей, а ёж — одну, но очень важную».
В 1953 году философ Исайя Берлин превратил эту фразу в метафору двух типов мышления.
Ежи объясняют мир через одну большую идею. Они последовательны, уверены в своей правоте и редко меняют убеждения.
Лисы видят множество возможностей, замечают противоречия и готовы пересматривать свои взгляды.
…
Иногда кажется, что Вселенная плетёт какую-то свою паутину: соединяет людей, идеи, места. А ты вдруг замечаешь эти связи и пытаешься понять, во что они складываются, но пока целого замысла не распознаешь.
Вчера летала по работе в Ереван и пошла поужинать в любимый ресторан «Мина». Встретила человека, с которым «сто лет назад» вместе работали и просидела до ночи с ним и его знакомыми.
Он начал делать невероятные …
В Дубае даже у искусственного интеллекта есть свой фестиваль. Непонятно, кто там больше знакомится люди или их AI-ассистенты 😄
Dubai AI Festival, конечно, впечатляет масштабом: AI-решения от персональных шопперов, которые помогают выбрать, что купить и с чем носить, до систем управления бизнесом. Многое ещё на стадии внедрения, а рядом уже огромное количество обучающих курсов: рынок одновременно создаёт инструменты …
Знать, как это работает, и суметь отпустить собственную хватку иногда две очень разные вещи.
Я сама об этом рассказываю и преподаю. Прекрасно понимаю, как напряжение сужает фокус и как важно давать себе пространство, чтобы видеть решения. Медитирую. И всё равно в одной важной для меня задаче никак не могла по-настоящему расслабиться.
Мы готовим мероприятие. И долго многое не складывалось. Я делала огромное количес…
В свежем выпуске Healthy to 100 прочитала об интересной тенденции - ужинах с незнакомцами.
Например, приложение Timeleft организует такие встречи более чем в сотне городов мира. Вы регистрируетесь, отвечаете на вопросы о себе, а алгоритм подбирает вам компанию из нескольких незнакомых людей. Вы не знаете заранее, кто придёт, чем эти люди занимаются и о чём будете разговаривать. Вам сообщают ресторан и время, а дальш…
А вы бы пошли на ужин с совершенно незнакомыми людьми?
С удовольствием!33%
Возможно39%
Не знаю4%
Нет9%
Не пробовал(а), но захотелось16%
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
❤11
Showing the 12 most recent of 62 posts we hold for @MPochinok. 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.
Polls
The 6 most recent of 7 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
The shares total 146%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
The shares total 102%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
The shares total 115%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 62 most recent posts we hold, published 13 July 2026 to 9 November 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
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 10 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.
Лидерская позиция | Андрей Шапенко @leadership_position · 27,486 Telegram ranks this channel #40 of 98 here — alongside 97 others — read 11 September 2026
Skolkovo School of Management @skolkovo_channel · 43,560 Telegram ranks this channel #41 of 100 here — alongside 99 others — read 28 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 10 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Люди и изменения - Марина Починок:” (@MPochinok), 7,698 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/MPochinok.
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.