Channel
@QuelyaProtocol
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Cite this entry
191subscribers
-3 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003189885227 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @QuelyaProtocol |
| Created | Between 1 September 2025 and 30 November 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 29 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 29 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/QuelyaProtocol |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 29 Aug 2026, 00:03 | 191 | -2 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 03:03 | 193 | -1 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 11:48 | 194 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 23:09 | 194 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 6 February 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 1 pageof 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 4 May 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
98 reactions across 20 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 39.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 39 | 39.8% | |
| ❤ | 22 | 22.4% | |
| ❤🔥 | 18 | 18.4% | |
| 👍 | 10 | 10.2% | |
| 🎉 | 4 | 4.08% | |
| 🏆 | 2 | 2.04% | |
| 🤝 | 2 | 2.04% | |
| 👨💻 | 1 | 1.02% |
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 98reactions 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 6 February 2026 to 4 May 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.
Hey everyone 👋 We owe you an update — and we're not going to dress it up. We've been quiet for the past several weeks. That wasn't the plan, but it happened because we made a decision to stop posting noise and focus on actually building and rethinking the strategy properly. The presale participation was smaller than we hoped for. We're being straight about that. But it gave us something useful: a moment to step ba…
👍5🤝2❤1
Soroban AMMs require explicit integration and are not automatically part of the routing system. Security model Protocol AMMs have no smart contract risk. Soroban AMMs depend on contract design, audits, and correct implementation. General-purpose vs Specialized Protocol AMMs are robust and general-purpose. Soroban AMMs can be optimized for very specific use cases — but with added complexity. A layered approac…
🔥3❤1
Trade-offs: Protocol-native vs Soroban AMMs On Stellar, liquidity can be built in two different ways: • Protocol-native AMMs (built directly into the network) • Soroban-based AMMs (implemented as smart contracts) Both approaches are powerful — but they are designed for different purposes and come with different trade-offs. Protocol-native AMMs These pools are part of the Stellar protocol itself. They are optimi…
🔥2❤1
What Soroban-based AMMs can do that protocol AMMs can’t Stellar already includes protocol-native AMMs built directly into the network. These pools are designed to be: • simple • predictable • deeply integrated with the DEX and path payments They provide a strong foundation for liquidity and routing. But with Soroban smart contracts, developers can now build a new category of liquidity systems: programmable AMMs. …
❤2❤🔥1🔥1
How Soroban integrates with Stellar AMMs Stellar’s native AMM system provides the base layer of liquidity for the network. With the introduction of Soroban smart contracts, developers can now build programmable applications that interact directly with that liquidity. This creates a powerful combination: protocol-native liquidity + programmable financial logic. Native AMMs vs Smart Contract AMMs On many blockchai…
❤🔥3❤1
How Path Payments & AMMs interact on Stellar One of the most powerful — and often misunderstood — features of Stellar is Path Payments. On Stellar, swaps and payments are not separate systems. They are unified. What is a path payment? A path payment allows: • Sender holds Asset A • Recipient wants Asset D Instead of requiring both parties to hold the same asset, Stellar automatically finds a route: Asset A → A…
❤🔥3❤1🔥1
How Stellar’s native AMM works under the hood Stellar’s AMM isn’t a smart contract layered on top of the network. It’s a protocol-native liquidity primitive, deeply integrated with the DEX, orderbooks, and pathfinding engine. That design choice makes a big difference. 1️⃣ Core AMM model Stellar uses a constant product formula (x · y = k) for its AMM pools — the same fundamental curve used by early Uniswap version…
❤🔥5🔥3❤1
Different AMM models — strengths & weaknesses Not all AMMs behave the same. 1️⃣ Constant Product (x·y = k) Used by many classic AMMs. Pros: • simple • permissionless • robust Cons: • high slippage • inefficient for stable assets 2️⃣ Stableswap (Curve-style) Optimized for similar-value assets. Pros: • very low slippage • capital efficient Cons: • fragile outside intended range • more complex 3️⃣ Hybrid / Wei…
❤3👍2🔥1
The winners of last weeks Random Winner Giveaway have been drawn & rewards have beed distributed. Also all rewards of the End-of-Presale incentive have been distributed. Here are the results Grand Prize: 100 XLM + 2,000 QLYA GCS7YNGJC2MQVBNYPZFNXCJCFHHSP4ZW52OZ2257DRJQYZCOUZXA22XZ Second Prizes: 50 XLM + 1,000 QLYA each GCLHEKV44D6YNOOUZRAIIEB2OX4WDJSWVALEJ6APJUDOAEWDZTKHJY4X GDDO27GELN2ODSRVNQJY5X73VMDEEL3URVZDI…
🎉2
The End-of-Presale Holder Incentive and weekly random winner programm will be distributed today. There will be no weekly draw this week.
🏆2
Liquidity pool vs AMM — what’s the difference? These terms are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same. A liquidity pool is: • a pool of assets • locked together • available for swaps An AMM (Automated Market Maker) is: • the pricing algorithm • that determines how trades affect price In short: ➡️ Liquidity pool = the assets ➡️ AMM = the math You can have: • different AMMs using the same pool struc…
🔥3❤1
Presale phase at 0.001 XLM has concluded as planned. Thank you to our foundational holders! Public sale starts now in phases with increasing prices to properly fund deep liquidity + core development (wallet, routing infra, etc.). Phase 1 pricing: 0.0035 XLM (limited volume) → full details + new offers live on site/Scopuly. During this short transition time we will deploy the vesting strategy to ensure token are temp…
🔥4❤1
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @QuelyaProtocol. 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.
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 29 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Quelya” (@QuelyaProtocol), 191 subscribers as measured 29 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/QuelyaProtocol.
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.