Channel
@Pragmatic_Sol
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
1,532subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001462785476 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @Pragmatic_Sol |
| Created | 13 August 2019 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/Pragmatic_Sol |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 17:34 | 1,532 | +1 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 19:02 | 1,531 | +1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 04:07 | 1,530 | -2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 11:36 | 1,532 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 09:49 | 1,532 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 24 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 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (24 June 2026 – 6 August 2026) |
| Views total | 5,197 |
| Reactions total | 157 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 18:09 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.
413 reactions across 20 posts, in 3 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 56.2% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 💯 | 232 | 56.2% | |
| 👍 | 168 | 40.7% | |
| ❤ | 13 | 3.15% |
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 20 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 413reactions 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 24 June 2026 to 6 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @Pragmatic_Sol. 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 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 24 June 2026 to 6 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.
Вопрос от Харда Почему Дуров считает, что террористы, мошенники, педофилы и прочий сброд непременно должны быть частью экосистемы телеграм - лично для меня загадка. Но правоохранительные органы, не возбудив в отношении него уголовное дело, сами нарушат закон - ибо им известно о совершаемом преступлении, а значит, они уже не могут самостоятельно решать - возбуждать или не возбуждать. Это просто неизбежный алгоритм пр…
💯14👍2
Я не согласен с выводом. Считаю, что даже после падения Киева, Украина продолжит сражаться и откатываться к своей западной границе. Если бы решения Украины диктовались политической или военной логикой, то война закончилась бы ещё на рубеже 22-го и 23го годов. Уже тогда стало понятно: Украина проиграет. А Россия победит, харкая кровью, пройдя через многолетнюю тяжёлую войну. У Украины не осталось ходов, которые вед…
💯37👍2
Ну он же не сам это всё снимал и придумывал. И вообще, в его карьере были уже провалы, но в то же время были и отличные произведения. А уж по теме инопланетянства, например, был сериал "Похищенные" 2001 года. Это вообще шедевр: настоящая сага, затрагивающая несколько поколений. То есть четверть века назад он уже снял эту историю, которую пытался показать в нынешнем фильме и она получилась на порядки лучше. В общем…
👍8
Единственный зачёт: все главные персонажи являются хрестоматийно белыми людьми. И главный злодей белый. И даже подружка главного героя белая девчонка. Разве что зачинщик всего этого побега - чёрный мужик, но он персонаж второго плана. Ну то есть не то, чтобы это было достижение, скорее возврат кино к некой нормальности, которая была раньше. Навевая дух нулевых годов, когда кино ещё было преимущественно белым. Но вре…
👍8
Посмотрел новый фильм Спилберга "День разоблачения". Могу с уверенностью сказать, что это одно из худших произведений за всю его карьеру. Люди, сравнивающие "это" с "Инопланетянином" либо не видели этот фильм, либо отрабатывают деньги. Я честно говоря даже не ожидал, что он вообще может снимать настолько плохо после пяти десятилетий действительно отличных историй. По сути это роуд-муви, где 90% экранного времени г…
👍5
Это эскалация, которая может приблизить мир.
👍21💯13
В тг вышли килопасты аналитики, почему хохол бьёт по складам Вайлдберрис. Какую только конспирологию и восхваление гениальностью укра не читал за эти дни. А на самом деле ответ до невозможности банален: хохол ударил по этим складам, потому что ни по чему другому он дотянуться не может. Напоминаю: никаких попаданий по топливной инфраструктуре не было уже 8 дней, да и то они там последний раз попали по цистерне. По мо…
💯20👍5
Моя работа завершена — Кир Стармер
💯18👍4
Сенатор США Линдси Грэм 10 июля встретился с Зеленским, а вчера был на заводе БПЛА на Украине. Сегодня стало известно о смерти республиканца. Грэму был 71 год. Его офис сообщил, что он умер из-за «внезапной и непродолжительной» болезни. RT собрал, чем запомнился русофоб, тесно связанный с лоббистами американской военной промышленности: ▪️в 2011—2016 годах он получал в среднем $67 тыс. в год от подрядчиков оборонно…
👍14
Мушки спилите.
💯13👍4
Песков (если убрать дипломатическое словоблудие): изменение позиции США к украинскому конфликту приведёт к тому, что России придётся увеличивать количество территорий, которые мы заберём у Украины.
👍10
Просто для понимания: Я полностью разделяю эмоции нашего инфополя и очень хочу сжечь этот украинский, а затем и европейский гадюшник в ядерном огне. А то чё они? Но я тут в основном не про эмоции пишу, но про прагматический подход и стратегический анализ. А он такой: -Стратегических рисков удары оппонентов пока не несут. Да, больно. Да, подгорает. Но реальной опасности для государственности, которая требовала бы пер…
👍23
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @Pragmatic_Sol. 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.
Citation-graph rank — 408,177 of 1,169,250entries 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.
Named by 2 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.
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.
@Pragmatic_Sol named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all.A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Прагматик Сол” (@Pragmatic_Sol), 1,532 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/Pragmatic_Sol.
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.