Channel

کانال رسمی مدافِعان سُـنَّت

@Modafean_Sonnat

On this record: Topic · Observations · Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry

1,619subscribers

+92 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID	-1001392800195
Type	Channel
Username	@Modafean_Sonnat
Created	Between 1 June 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	16 September 2026
Measurements held	15
Confirmed unchanged	1 time, most recently 16 September 2026
On Telegram	t.me/Modafean_Sonnat

Topic

Religion — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 100% 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.

Observations

These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.

Content that also appears on other registered channels

Posts published here appear word for word on 1 other registered channel. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.

Matching posts — open both and compare (6 of the pairs behind the counts below)
Posted first	Then	Overlap	Gap
@Modafean_Sonnat/6721 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 10:53 UTC	@rodoud_elmi/39097 Aug 2026, 11:01 UTC	1.00	7 minutes
@Modafean_Sonnat/6725 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 10:54 UTC	@rodoud_elmi/39137 Aug 2026, 11:01 UTC	1.00	7 minutes
@Modafean_Sonnat/6726 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 10:54 UTC	@rodoud_elmi/39147 Aug 2026, 11:01 UTC	1.00	7 minutes
@Modafean_Sonnat/6727 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 10:55 UTC	@rodoud_elmi/39157 Aug 2026, 11:01 UTC	1.00	5 minutes
@Modafean_Sonnat/6728 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 10:55 UTC	@rodoud_elmi/39167 Aug 2026, 11:01 UTC	1.00	5 minutes
@Modafean_Sonnat/6729 · this entry7 Aug 2026, 10:56 UTC	@rodoud_elmi/39177 Aug 2026, 11:01 UTC	1.00	5 minutes

Every channel this entry shares post bodies with
Channel	Matching posts	Text overlap	Typical gap	Published first
@rodoud_elmi	18 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed)	1.00	5 minutes	this entry (18–0)

Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.

What this cannot establish

MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.

Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.

“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 39 comparable posts for this entry, running 25 June 2026 to 7 August 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.

The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.

Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).

Across the whole group of 2, the earliest publisher we hold is @Modafean_Sonnat — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.

Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 7 August 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.

Also posting the same content

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.

اݪتَحقِیقآتــــ 🔍
@rodoud_elmi · Channel1,662 subscribers

Growth

15 measurements spanning 41 days, net +92. 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 1,513–1,633 and does not start at zero.

Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)	Subscribers	Change
16 Sept 2026, 08:02	1,619	+17
12 Sept 2026, 20:16	1,602	+17
8 Sept 2026, 22:21	1,585	+8
3 Sept 2026, 10:25	1,577	+16
31 Aug 2026, 14:57	1,561	+3
28 Aug 2026, 10:37	1,558	+2
25 Aug 2026, 01:34	1,556	+9
21 Aug 2026, 08:14	1,547	-3
18 Aug 2026, 18:52	1,550	+4
16 Aug 2026, 04:36	1,546	+5
12 Aug 2026, 23:14	1,541	+10
9 Aug 2026, 20:53	1,531	+2
6 Aug 2026, 15:25	1,529	+2
6 Aug 2026, 08:33	1,527	no change
6 Aug 2026, 08:27	1,527	first reading

Engagement

40 posts held, back to 25 June 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 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 40 posts for this entry, the most recent from 7 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.

Reaction mix

11 reactions across 3 posts, in 1 kind.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction	Count	Share	Share, drawn
❤	11	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 23 of the 40 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 250 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 40 most recent posts we hold, published 25 June 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.

Recent posts

7 Aug 2026, 10:58 UTC54 views8 reactionsread 7 August 2026

خلاصه‌ای از کنفرانس : ❶ ما ابتدا به آیه‌ی وضو پرداختیم. و با ٨ دلیل قاطع، ثابت کردیم که آیه، صریحاً و منحصراً دلالت بر شستن پاها در وضو دارد. ❷ سپس به روایات صحیح شیعه اشاره نمودیم که مجموعاً صراحت در شستن پا در وضو داشت. ❸ سپس به قرائت‌جَر پرداختیم. که دالّ بر مسح استيعاب و یا مسح بر خُفّین بود. و این دو را از روایات شیعه نیز اثبات نمودیم. ❹ و نهایتاً به روایاتی که شیعیان استناد می‌کنند پرداختیم و ثابت کردیم که …

❤8