Channel
@MakkanMusings
On this record: Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
1,861subscribers
+8 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001389636253 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @MakkanMusings |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 July 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 13 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 13 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/MakkanMusings |
This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 13 Aug 2026, 11:28 | 1,861 | +2 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 17:11 | 1,859 | +5 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 10:37 | 1,854 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 15:02 | 1,853 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 14:52 | 1,853 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 26 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 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
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 14 of 20 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (26 July 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 7,116 |
| Reactions total | 94 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 17:25 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.
Measured directly from 1 video 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.
94 reactions across 13 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🤣 | 47 | 50.0% | |
| ❤ | 24 | 25.5% | |
| 👍 | 7 | 7.45% | |
| 🥴 | 7 | 7.45% | |
| 😍 | 4 | 4.26% | |
| ❤🔥 | 1 | 1.06% | |
| 🔥 | 1 | 1.06% | |
| 😁 | 1 | 1.06% | |
| 🤔 | 1 | 1.06% | |
| 🤨 | 1 | 1.06% |
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 14 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 94reactions 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 26 July 2026 to 7 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.
Until the early-90s the DSM committee framed 'repeated sexual intercourse in a casual relationship' as a symptom of 'antisocial personality disorder'. But by the late-90s the moral mood had changed so the committee voted to drop the idea... - DSM is a work of culture not science. Dr James Davies
Post-SSRI Sexual Dysfunction is commonly misunderstood, even by people who experience it. The following infograph should help explain #PSSD to those who are not familiar with it.
This brings us back to the fatwa on using zakat funds for political causes. What purpose does it serve? Who is shaping that purpose? And why? Had this been a fatwa about using general funds to fund a PAC, or influence politicians, there would be no objection. Why specifically zakat funds? Who decides which political candidates can receive these funds? How much are we going to assess a politician’s overall platform …
👍2❤1
I just finished reading this piece by Sh Amr Abu Ayyub and I highly recommend it. https://theoryinpractice.medium.com/yasir-qadhi-and-the-problem-of-damnation-4e10d26090a8
❤3👍3🔥1
"Feminism poses a threat to everything good in western culture, perhaps especially to women’s capacity to love, reason, and exercise self-restraint. I was an adherent of feminism before I became a critic. I have felt its euphoric exultation and its self-flattering conviction of moral purity. Later, I recognized its hubris and moral hollowness….
“I am familiar with feminism’s core texts, from Mary Wollstonecraft to Mary Anne Franks, having studied them and believed in them for years. I understand the psychology and the history of the movement because I lived inside it for many years. Unlike others who have criticized feminism’s excesses, I contend that although there are some moderate feminists, there was never a moderate feminism inspired by reasonable goa…
As-Salamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh, In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Project Ihya is pleased to announce the release of the Introduction to our response series addressing some of the most common objections to the Hadith tradition, using Joshua Little's list of 21 objections as its framework. This project is the combined effort of the Project Ihya Research Team which is compo…
❤3🤔1🤨1
🔴 فهرست التحريف من 1 الى 100 👈(هنا) 🔴 🔴 كتاب تحريف الشيعة لفضائل الصحابة (هنا) 🔴 📚الاعترافات حول الكذب والتحريف - الاعتراف بتحريف الروايات وبترها - محاولة إخفاء كوارث متقدمي الشيعة - محاولة الخوئي لإخفاء كوارث اصحاب الائمة - اعترافات علماء الشيعة بتحريفات الصدوق - اعتراف الوائلي ان الشيعة يكذبون بالمصادر 📚مواضيع حول الإمام البخاري - فهرست توضيح الشبهات حول الامام البخاري - اعتراف علماء الشيعة بصدق الامام البخاري - …
أنشر هذا وقد تكون عندي ملاحظات عليه،ولكن بالجملة العمل طيب والجمع ممتاز وأسأل الله أن يبارك فيه، وهو مرجع لابد منه لمن أراد أن يكتب وينقد في مثل هذا الأمر.
The cover page is still undefeated https://x.com/TheInfamousRG/status/2084116634680107472?s=20
🤣2🥴1
UbF refutes UbF
🤣12
Guys yalls not rdy for dis…
🥴3
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @MakkanMusings. 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 — 214,377 of 1,340,412entries 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.
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.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
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 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Telegrams from Makkah” (@MakkanMusings), 1,861 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/MakkanMusings.
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.