Ecommerce storefront — 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 8 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 70% 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 the other topics.
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 in near-verbatim form on 1 other registered channel. This entry also forms a group of 2 channels linked by matching posts. 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)
Channels this entry shares post bodies with, where at least one matching post pair has no forward credit between the two channels, or to a common source, recorded in our data
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. 7 of the 7 matches recorded here fall after that date and carried no header when we read them. The rest predate reliable capture and are not evidence either way.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 61 comparable posts for this entry, running 4 August 2026 to 13 November 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).
Of the group of 2 channels, the one whose matching posts we hold earliest is @RegaPlus — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the key clone_mutual, last confirmed 14 November 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.
Channels linked by matching posts
This channel is in a group of 2 registered channels linked by matching posts. Links are found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown in this list. “First” could only mean first in our own crawl, which depends on how deep we happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. Our one hand-check read 45 of the highest-confidence flagged pairs against the live Telegram pages. In 18 of them the live page showed a “Forwarded from” credit that our database had no record of, so reading that pair as an unattributed copy was wrong; the check did not measure who published first. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Near-verbatim 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.
66 measurements spanning 100 days, net +73,669. 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 1,433,029–1,528,798 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 66
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
14 Nov 2026, 14:59
1,517,748
+2,940
11 Nov 2026, 16:10
1,514,808
+1,551
9 Nov 2026, 23:47
1,513,257
+2,187
8 Nov 2026, 16:37
1,511,070
+1,684
7 Nov 2026, 08:11
1,509,386
+677
6 Nov 2026, 09:39
1,508,709
+1,100
5 Nov 2026, 08:11
1,507,609
+955
4 Nov 2026, 10:37
1,506,654
+915
3 Nov 2026, 07:56
1,505,739
+629
2 Nov 2026, 08:58
1,505,110
+502
1 Nov 2026, 12:05
1,504,608
+2,453
31 Oct 2026, 09:48
1,502,155
+1,537
30 Oct 2026, 09:05
1,500,618
+1,136
29 Oct 2026, 09:46
1,499,482
+1,370
28 Oct 2026, 09:48
1,498,112
+661
27 Oct 2026, 13:11
1,497,451
+655
26 Oct 2026, 11:45
1,496,796
+694
25 Oct 2026, 09:27
1,496,102
+980
24 Oct 2026, 09:56
1,495,122
+541
23 Oct 2026, 08:08
1,494,581
first reading
Engagement
830 posts held, back to 3 August 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 286 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
17.6%
avg views ÷ 1,517,748 subscribers
Avg views / post
268,000
236 posts measured
Reaction rate
—
this channel exposes no reaction counts
Posts in window
236
of 830 held
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.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 14 November 2026
Posts held
830 (3 August 2026 – 14 November 2026)
Views total
63,162,300
Reactions total
—
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
15 Nov 2026, 00:00 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.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
18m 23s
Average length
15s
Measured directly from 73 videos 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.
View velocity
How fast this channel’s own posts pick up views, from re-reading them repeatedly in the hours and days after they were published rather than the single reading most entries on this register get. Coverage is early and only a small minority of channels hold it at all — a gap in this section means the post has not been re-read again yet, not that nothing happened.
Computed from 284 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days: across 201 of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 11 hours of being posted; a typical post has already reached 30.0% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 60.0% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 204,000 views — 13.4% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 221,000).
8 most recently posted, with a view-velocity reading
60 minutes: 53,843 interp. → 3.0 hours: 91,400 → 6.0 hours: 135,000 → 12 hours: 199,000still climbing at last reading
not yet at 24h
3.9 hoursprovisional — final view count still climbing
Curve is every standard checkpoint we hold a reading for (+1h, +3h, +6h, +12h, +24h, +48h, +7d after posting) — measured where a real reading landed close enough to that age, interpolated where it did not but readings on both sides let one be worked out between them. Nothing is ever extrapolated past the last real reading. Latest reading is the newest view and reaction count we hold for the post, side by side, so a gap between how views and reactions moved is visible without following it into the Observations section above. 24h reach is that one checkpoint on its own, labelled the same way. Half of last-observed views is the age at which a post’s view count crossed half of the highest figure we have read for it so far — an upper bound when the very first reading was already past half (we cannot see the actual crossing), and biased low while the post is still climbing, since “half of final” is dividing by a number that has not finished growing yet. Both caveats are printed inline wherever they apply, never silently dropped.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 20 of 236 posts held from the last 30 days (8.47%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
🎁 بونوس ۲۵ درصدی اسلات ویژه تولد ۱۱ سالگی بتفوروارد 🎰
⏩ تا هشتم آذر ماه، به مناسبت تولد ۱۱ سالگی بت فوروارد، با فعالسازی بونوس در حساب کاربری و سپس حداقل ۲۰ میلیون ریال واریز ریالی یا دلاری در روزهای شنبه و یا یکشنبه، در هر روز معادل ۲۵ درصد مبلغ واریزی خود را به عنوان بونوس ماشین اسلات از بتفوروارد هدیه بگیرید.
اطلاعات بیشتر و قوانین بونوس:
🔗 bwrd.link/11THSLOTS
👍 ورود به سایت با فیلترشکن
کلیک کنید BetForwar…
💥 اکانت 60 گیگ فقط - 39 تومن 💥
یعنی هر گیگ زیر 1000 تومن 🍀
پس گرون نخر عزیزم ❤️
برای دریافت بزن رو لینک زیر 👇
https://t.me/WIZARD_XRAY_BOT
Showing the 12 most recent of 830 posts we hold for @RegaPlus. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@RegaPlus edited 19 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
14 August 2026
Most recent edit
11 November 2026
Posts recorded as deleted after publishing
We recorded 187 posts on @RegaPlus as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
First seen missing
7 August 2026
Most recent seen missing
11 November 2026
Median time before seen missing
19 hours
Seen missing in the last 30 days
51
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republished by 466 registered channels. The 48 listed are the ones that have forwarded the most posts; the rest are counted here but not each listed.
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.
Mentions
Named by 367 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. The 20 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
1
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
1
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
0
vacant every time we have ever looked
@RegaPlus 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.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
@retrovip_channle named in 1 post, 9 August 2026 – 9 August 2026 · confirmed gone 4 November 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 8 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
TONY @Tonynotes · 19,672 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 72 here — alongside 71 others — read 4 October 2026
bunch of weirdos @bunchofwierdos · 18,993 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 54 here — alongside 53 others — read 1 October 2026
غیبت کنیم | Gossip Plus @Gossipplus · 38,545 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 57 here — alongside 56 others — read 30 September 2026
شما در تئاتر هستید. @JaaeKeHasti · 23,663 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 53 here — alongside 52 others — read 18 September 2026
-𝐍𝐚𝐬𝐡𝐧𝐚𝐬 𝐇𝐚𝐫𝐟 𝐁𝐳𝐧𝐢𝐦! @harfbzaniiim · 23,310 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 51 here — alongside 50 others — read 16 September 2026
شیتینگ! @eatingshitt · 95,318 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 13 September 2026
Chérie @asallweo · 28,027 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 55 here — alongside 54 others — read 11 September 2026
بیسلول• @bislull · 35,286 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 70 here — alongside 69 others — read 6 September 2026
𝗕𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝗖𝗮𝗹𝗺𝗹𝘆 @acalchnll · 30,007 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 73 here — alongside 72 others — read 6 September 2026
Ending @EyesLieChico · 35,454 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 5 September 2026
⊰ مبهم ⊱ @einvolveed · 32,096 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 67 here — alongside 66 others — read 4 September 2026
🤑IRANET PROXY🤑 @iranetproxy · 33,097 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 64 here — alongside 63 others — read 2 September 2026
ما مردم ™ @MaMrdom · 130,804 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 1 September 2026
aviothic | دیالوگ @aviothicw · 106,497 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 73 here — alongside 72 others — read 31 August 2026
پارانوئید خفیف @Xcole · 37,059 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 61 here — alongside 60 others — read 30 August 2026
برایِ...! | موزیک @BarayeChnl · 39,590 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 66 here — alongside 65 others — read 29 August 2026
فوداتون : @Foodatun · 42,863 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 72 here — alongside 71 others — read 28 August 2026
EXTASY’MinD @extasymind · 206,299 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 61 here — alongside 60 others — read 27 August 2026
چنل ابطحی @sajjad_abtahi1 · 44,805 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 73 here — alongside 72 others — read 27 August 2026
چنل پدرت @pedaretdiana · 48,550 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 52 here — alongside 51 others — read 25 August 2026
” گا @GaArea · 60,087 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 73 here — alongside 72 others — read 25 August 2026
Vinyv @vinyvidzam · 60,314 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 61 here — alongside 60 others — read 21 August 2026
حاجی میگم ... @hajiMigam · 67,036 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 20 August 2026
-گوه هایی که نباید بخوریم- @donteatthishit · 69,534 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 79 here — alongside 78 others — read 20 August 2026
This channel appears in 1,542 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Domains linked from posts
2 domains this channel’s own posts have linked to, measured by scanning the post bodies themselves — not the channel’s description, which is the separate Declared links section below when this entry has one. Appearing here is not a claim about who runs the linked site or why the channel linked to it; an advertisement, a news citation and a malicious link all leave the same kind of row.
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 14 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“RegaPlus” (@RegaPlus), 1,517,748 subscribers as measured 14 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/RegaPlus.
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.
