5 measurements spanning 16 days, net -9. 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 1,601–1,612 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
22 Aug 2026, 06:07
1,602
-1
12 Aug 2026, 20:46
1,603
-5
9 Aug 2026, 16:03
1,608
-3
6 Aug 2026, 07:22
1,611
no change
5 Aug 2026, 23:26
1,611
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 19 August 2023 — 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.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 16 July 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Reaction mix
96 reactions across 13 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 42.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
41
42.7%
👍
38
39.6%
🔥
16
16.7%
👎
1
1.04%
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 13 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 96reactions 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 19 August 2023 to 16 July 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.
قُرّاء استراتيجوس الأكارم ،،
طالت المسافات، وتباعدت الطرق، وكثرت التساؤلات من القريب والبعيد.
توقفنا لفترة ليست بالقصيرة، لم تكن سهلة علينا، وربما عليكم كذلك!
لكن بعد هذا التوقف كان لا بد لنا من انطلاقة جديدة، نسير بها سوياً للتفكر في واقعنا بشكل منهجي، ومحاولة التحول من التفكير إلى العمل ولو كان بسيطاً.
سنبدأ قريباً أول أنشطتنا بحول الله، وستكون رحلة ماتعة بإذن الله مع أحد الكتب.
وقبل أن ننطلق، نعلن فتح باب التطوع …
لماذا النوايا الحسنة لا تكفي لإصلاح المشاكل المعقدة؟
لماذا مبادراتنا ومشاريعنا لا تحل المشاكل بل تزيدها أحيانا؟
لماذا ندور في دائرة مفرغة من المشاريع الفاشلة ونكررها؟
لماذا ننشغل بإطفاء الحرائق وننسى العمل الاستراتيجي المثمر؟
هذه الأسئلة ليست عشوائية، بل تكشف عن بنى تفكير بالية يجب التخلص منها.
الخبر الجميل هو أن هناك منهجيات علمية تجعلك تتخلص فورا من هذه الطريقة في التفكير والعمل، وتنقلك مباشرة إلى رؤية استراتيجية…
يبدو أن الاهتمام الأكبر لكم هو بفهم الصورة الكلية للقضايا المعقدة، وكيف أنها تتشابك فيما بينها بخيوط رفيعة لا يراها إلا المفكر الاستراتيجي الذي لا ينشغل بالأحداث، بل بالأنماط المتكررة، والبنى التي تنتجها.
لو أُتيحت لك تجربة تعليمية تغيّر طريقة تفكيرك أو طريقة عملك، هل تميل أكثر إلى:
منهج جديد للفهم والتحليل؟76%
أدوات عملية للإنجاز السريع؟35%
The shares total 111%, 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.
هل المشكلات في مؤسساتنا سببها “ضعف التنفيذ” أم “ضعف الفهم”؟
نعمل في استراتيجوس على مبادرة جديدة تستهدف القادة والمبدعين وصنّاع التغيير، ونودّ أن نفهم بدقّة أين تكمن عُقدة التقدّم الحقيقي. شاركنا رأيك بصراحة
لدينا خطط كثيرة لكن التنفيذ ضعيف.33%
لا نرى الصورة الكاملة، فالمشكلات تتكرر بأشكال جديدة.64%
نفتقد إلى التعاون بين الجهات أو الفرق.29%
لا توجد آليات متابعة ذكية وواضحة.36%
The shares total 162%, 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.
لو فتحت الآن غوغل أو سألت أداة ذكاء صناعي لتحل مشكلتك في التغيير والعمل لأجل الأمة، ما الذي ستكتبه أو تسأله أولًا؟
.
شاركه معنا في الرسائل الخاصة تكرمًا.
The shares total 136%, 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.
لو سنحت لك فرصة الانضمام لمجتمع حيّ، ماذا تود أن تحصل أولًا؟
وضوح في رؤية الصورة الكلية.48%
أدوات عملية لتحويل الأفكار إلى خطط.71%
شبكة من أشخاص يشبهونني.23%
مساحة نقاش عميق بعيدًا عن الضجيج.27%
The shares total 169%, 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 149%, 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.
💡 هل لديك فكرة أو اقتراح لنشاط، موضوع، أو طريقة تفاعل تتمنى أن تراها في هذا المشروع الجديد؟
يمكنك مشاركتنا عبر إرسال رسالة خاصة مباشرة إلى القناة (وقد فتحناها لهذا الغرض). نحن نرحب بكل اقتراح يساعدنا على رسم التجربة القادمة معًا.
The shares total 176%, 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.
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @OnStrategos. 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.
لو أُتيحت لك تجربة تعليمية تغيّر طريقة تفكيرك أو طريقة عملك، هل تميل أكثر إلى:
منهج جديد للفهم والتحليل؟76%
أدوات عملية للإنجاز السريع؟35%
The shares total 111%, 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.
هل المشكلات في مؤسساتنا سببها “ضعف التنفيذ” أم “ضعف الفهم”؟
نعمل في استراتيجوس على مبادرة جديدة تستهدف القادة والمبدعين وصنّاع التغيير، ونودّ أن نفهم بدقّة أين تكمن عُقدة التقدّم الحقيقي. شاركنا رأيك بصراحة
لدينا خطط كثيرة لكن التنفيذ ضعيف.33%
لا نرى الصورة الكاملة، فالمشكلات تتكرر بأشكال جديدة.64%
نفتقد إلى التعاون بين الجهات أو الفرق.29%
لا توجد آليات متابعة ذكية وواضحة.36%
The shares total 162%, 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 136%, 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.
لو سنحت لك فرصة الانضمام لمجتمع حيّ، ماذا تود أن تحصل أولًا؟
وضوح في رؤية الصورة الكلية.48%
أدوات عملية لتحويل الأفكار إلى خطط.71%
شبكة من أشخاص يشبهونني.23%
مساحة نقاش عميق بعيدًا عن الضجيج.27%
The shares total 169%, 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 149%, 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 176%, 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.
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 20 most recent posts we hold, published 19 August 2023 to 16 July 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
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.
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 22 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“استراتيجوس” (@OnStrategos), 1,602 subscribers as measured 22 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/OnStrategos.
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.
