Channel
@SeafarersLens
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
247subscribers
+1 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1003117070532 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @SeafarersLens |
| Created | Between 1 September 2025 and 30 November 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 29 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 29 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/SeafarersLens |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 29 Aug 2026, 20:55 | 247 | -2 |
| 22 Aug 2026, 07:56 | 249 | +1 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 06:21 | 248 | +2 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 06:47 | 246 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 06:31 | 246 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 13 July 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.
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 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (13 July 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 129 |
| Reactions total | — |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 06:47 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.
2 reactions across 2 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 1 | 50.0% | |
| 👍 | 1 | 50.0% |
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 2 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 2reactions 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 13 July 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.
Bonding and electrical isolation are often confused during tanker transfers. This short carousel explains what must be bonded, where isolation is required, and what can bypass it. https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/08/03/bonding-is-not-insulation-cargo-transfer-checklist/
During a recent call at Sungai Linggi, I saw several older LNG carriers lying in laid-up condition. That sight brought me back to an earlier DeepDraft article on LNG, methane slip and the gap between cleaner machinery and the fuel’s full climate account. The ships are becoming more efficient. The questions around upstream leakage, liquefaction energy and engine-specific methane slip remain. I have now updated the …
“The bonding cable is connected” does not confirm that electrical isolation has been maintained. This short explains the difference. https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/08/03/bonding-is-not-insulation-cargo-transfer-checklist/ AI-generated visual explainer.
“The bonding cable is connected.” That answer may sound correct, but it does not confirm electrical isolation. During tanker cargo transfer, bonding is required within each ship, while isolation must be maintained between the ships. https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/08/03/bonding-is-not-insulation-cargo-transfer-checklist/
The figures are easy to list. Explaining why each one is different is harder. This carousel traces SDMBL, LDBF, WLL and winch brake setting back to the ship’s design basis. Full article: https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/07/27/meg-4-mooring-numbers-why-ships-are-still-getting-confused/ #MEG4 #MooringSafety #ShipOperations
ARCHIVE DAY | WHEN SHIPPING TURNS GREY Shadow-fleet risk is no longer only about sanctioned vessels and opaque ownership. When flag status, insurance, AIS history, or commercial control become unclear, the exposure moves directly to the Master, crew, and ship manager. The companies behind the trade may disappear behind layers of ownership. The vessel and those onboard remain available to authorities, investigators…
“Sixty percent” was once simple onboard. MEG4 made the reference clearer, but the old language remains, and that is where four mooring figures still get mixed up. https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/07/27/meg-4-mooring-numbers-why-ships-are-still-getting-confused/ AI-generated visual explainer based on the original DeepDraft article.
Even after years of MEG4, I still see SDMBL, LDBF, WLL and winch brake setting being treated as interchangeable onboard. They are connected, but each has a different purpose. I have explained the distinction here in practical terms: https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/07/27/meg-4-mooring-numbers-why-ships-are-still-getting-confused/
DeepDraft Weekly Maritime Brief | July 26, 2026 Vessel-level risk has spread across the operating picture. Hormuz, the Red Sea, the South China Sea, the Black Sea and the Gulf of Aden now point to the same issue: voyage control margin is narrowing while bridge teams still need to understand the ECDIS correction picture. Full Weekly Brief: https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/07/26/vessel-level-risk-chokepoints-ecdis-july…
Is your bridge team checking only whether ECDIS is updated, or also where each temporary correction sits? Full analysis: https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/07/20/ecdis-corrections-aio-ep-no-overlay/
Shipping must decarbonise. But the burden cannot remain concentrated on the sector that is easiest to measure, regulate and charge. This archive revival looks at war emissions, unequal ESG pressure and the operational reality of ships still managing fuel changeovers and environmental compliance through conflict zones. Full article: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/shippings-green-ledger-does-count-war-raghu-sharma-1t…
❤1
A green update report confirms that ECDIS data was loaded. It does not confirm that every correction affecting the passage has been understood. https://thedeepdraft.com/2026/07/20/ecdis-corrections-aio-ep-no-overlay/ Video contains AI-generated visuals. Read the article for the detailed technical analysis.
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @SeafarersLens. 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.
Citation-graph rank — 439,685 of 1,627,068entries 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.
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.
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.
“DeepDraft” (@SeafarersLens), 247 subscribers as measured 29 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/SeafarersLens.
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.