Channel
@SureRipe
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
2,837subscribers
-7 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1002330649822 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @SureRipe |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 13 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 13 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/SureRipe |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 13 Aug 2026, 10:36 | 2,837 | -6 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 20:24 | 2,843 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 20:02 | 2,844 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 19:37 | 2,844 | first reading |
19 posts held, back to 25 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 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 29 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 19 (25 June 2026 – 29 July 2026) |
| Views total | 4,134 |
| Reactions total | 58 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 20:02 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.
220 reactions across 13 posts, in 13 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 25.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 55 | 25.0% | |
| ❤ | 51 | 23.2% | |
| 💯 | 31 | 14.1% | |
| 💩 | 20 | 9.09% | |
| 🤡 | 20 | 9.09% | |
| 👏 | 13 | 5.91% | |
| 🔥 | 9 | 4.09% | |
| 🤔 | 7 | 3.18% | |
| 👎 | 4 | 1.82% | |
| 😁 | 4 | 1.82% | |
| 🤣 | 3 | 1.36% | |
| 😢 | 2 | 0.909% | |
| 🥴 | 1 | 0.455% |
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 19 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 220reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 25 June 2026 to 29 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.
当然，抛开这些不谈。 如果面对问题时，选择沉默。 如果明知道有人伤害别人，却选择视而不见。 如果因为利益、关系或者所谓的圈内地位，继续纵容对方保持高高在上的姿态。 那么，旁观者真的只是旁观者吗？ 让施暴者继续作恶，本身也是对受害者的一种伤害。 当一个圈子开始习惯性包庇错误，习惯性维护强势的一方，最终被消耗的不是某一个人，而是整个圈子的信任。 今天被忽视的是别人。 明天也可能轮到自己。 真正维护圈子，不是无脑站队，而是在该指出问题的时候敢于指出问题。 因为沉默，有时候并不是中立。
👏5💯2
🍉 Emby 圈观察｜ 一次事件，看清一个圈子 这次事件，无疑让很多人重新审视了 Emby 这个圈子。 不可否认，圈子里确实存在不少问题。 有些腐竹开服，慢慢从“提供服务”变成了“经营身份”。 通过： • 限量名额 • 特殊资格 • 内部圈层 让用户产生一种“被认可”的感觉。 久而久之，原本简单的服务关系，逐渐变成了上下关系。 有些腐竹甚至把开服当成了一种权力象征。 开个服，仿佛完成了一场加冕。 拥有用户和管理权限后，开始享受这种身份带来的优越感。 管理权限本应该只是维护秩序的工具。 但在部分人手里，却变成了展示地位的方式。 封禁、删帖、踢人，本该是最后手段，却成为了证明存在感的权利。 而部分管理也是如此。 拿到一点权限后，容易产生身份优越感。 用户提出问题时，第一反应不是解决问题，而是维护自己的位置。 管理不是权力，而是一份责任。 还有一些频道主，面对争议时似乎形成了一套固定流程： 事情发生 ⬇️ 发小作文 ⬇️…
💯12❤4
Posted without readable text
💯13❤4
Posted without readable text
😁4🤡3👍2😢2❤1
📰 吃瓜快讯｜黑白灰低价会员翻车事件 📌 事件经过 今日，圈内关于黑白灰低价会员事件持续发酵，引发大量讨论。 据了解，黑白灰此前曾以 50 元出售相关会员，次日价格上涨至 140 元。有网友质疑其存在低价售卖后涨价获利的情况，且售卖期间曾宣传“抓紧薅”等内容。 随后，不少购买用户反馈，其会员权益已陆续被官方回收，事件迅速引起关注。 ⸻ 🗣 双方回应 ① 黑白灰回应 黑白灰表示： “50 块就当买个教训，我自己的会员也被回收了。” 其称，在售卖前已向咨询及购买用户明确说明： • 无质保 • 无 SLA 售后保障 • 存在被官方回收风险 • 风险均已提前告知 因此，其认为购买者已知悉相关风险，后续不属于售后保障范围。 ② @eeyoreoio 说法 对此，@eeyoreoio 表示，购买前卖家曾宣传“不会回收”“稳定可用”等内容，而在会员被回收后，又以“无质保、无 SLA、不退不保”等条款回应。 其认为…
🤡6
保熟瓜棚🍉 pinned «某 Emby 评测频道发布长文回应，再次引发争议 近日，某 Emby 圈评测频道发布了一篇长文，回顾自己做频道几个月来的经历，并回应近期外界的各种质疑。 频道主表示，自己最初做频道并没有想着赚钱，也没想过做大，只是因为自己刚接触 Emby 时踩了很多坑，希望把整理出来的经验分享给后来的人，让新人少走一些弯路。 文中提到： 「说实话，当初创建这个频道的时候，根本没想那么多，没有想过做大，也没想过靠这个赚多少钱，更没想过去影响谁。」 「我只是觉得 Emby 圈的信息太分散，很多新人根本不知道从哪里了…»
某 Emby 评测频道发布长文回应，再次引发争议 近日，某 Emby 圈评测频道发布了一篇长文，回顾自己做频道几个月来的经历，并回应近期外界的各种质疑。 频道主表示，自己最初做频道并没有想着赚钱，也没想过做大，只是因为自己刚接触 Emby 时踩了很多坑，希望把整理出来的经验分享给后来的人，让新人少走一些弯路。 文中提到： 「说实话，当初创建这个频道的时候，根本没想那么多，没有想过做大，也没想过靠这个赚多少钱，更没想过去影响谁。」 「我只是觉得 Emby 圈的信息太分散，很多新人根本不知道从哪里了解服务器，不知道怎么避坑，也不知道什么适合自己。」 他认为，很多信息长期掌握在少数人手里，新人只能不断试错、不断交学费，因此自己才开始整理服务器、线路、资源等内容，希望给大家多一个参考。 不过，也有网友对此并不买账，评论称： 「越想澄清什么，就越干了什么。」 并表示，频道刚开始做评测时，抽奖、送播放器、送 Emby 服务…
❤14👍3👎2👏2
📢 Feifei 争议事件盘点：从合作推广到多次风波 近期 Emby 圈围绕 Feifei 的讨论持续升温。 作为拥有较大影响力的频道主，从早期参与各类项目推广，到后续多次陷入争议，Feifei 的公开言论与行为也一次次成为圈内讨论焦点。 以下内容整理自公开信息，仅作事件回顾。 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 📝 出题事件｜被吐槽一个月，问题真的都在别人吗？ 除了资源和合作争议外，Feifei 的出题方式也曾引发大量讨论。 其中一道题目： 题目： 李白的名字称呼（混合中文、小写字母，长度四位） 答案： 苏东po 🤣 由于题目描述与答案之间关联性较弱，不少网友认为属于“脑筋急转弯式答案”，与题面提示存在较大偏差，因此连续被吐槽了很长一段时间。 不少网友调侃： 被一个人吐槽，也许只是观点不同； 被很多人持续吐槽，或许也应该想想，问题是否真的全在别人身上。 ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ 🦈 鲨鱼服｜从积极推…
❤17👍6🤣3👏1🔥1
📢 近期 Feifei 宣传的“专属、限量、白名单”引发了不少讨论，也让人开始思考频道主在商业宣传中的责任边界。 频道主与供应商合作宣传，本身无可厚非，互利互惠也是互联网圈子里很常见的合作方式。但合作的前提，是否应该建立在真实体验产品、了解供应商背景、对其运营情况进行基本了解的基础上？还是仅凭对方提供的信息便开始宣传推广？ 如果后续供应商出现跑路、失联或无法履约等情况，用户究竟应该追究供应商，还是也有理由质疑曾经进行强力推荐、甚至以自身信誉进行背书的频道主？虽然最终提供服务的是供应商，但频道主的推荐往往也是用户决定购买的重要原因之一。 另一方面，“专属” “限量” “白名单” 等宣传用语也引发了不少争议。“专属” 是否意味着已经与该供应商形成较深的合作关系，甚至存在一定程度的利益绑定？“限量” “白名单”是真实的资源限制，还是利用稀缺感制造紧迫氛围，以提高转化率？如果所谓的 “限量” 长期、反复出现，那么用户自然会产生质疑…
👍7❤2🔥2
保熟瓜棚🍉 pinned «📢 “奶茶事件”再起波澜，墨白回应Feifei 针对近日持续发酵的“奶茶事件”，墨白公开回应了相关争议，并说明了事情经过。 据墨白介绍，当初前来购买账号的是一个陌生小号，而并非 Feifei 的常用账号。由于双方此前并无接触，他当时并不知道该账号实际归属，因此只是按照正常流程完成了交易。 墨白表示，直到后来 Feifei 主动公开聊天记录及用户名后，他才回查历史记录，确认当初购买账号的小号确实属于 Feifei。对于外界讨论的“奶茶”一事，墨白称，自己并未收取 Feifei 所说的奶茶，也不存在因一…»
📢 “奶茶事件”再起波澜，墨白回应Feifei 针对近日持续发酵的“奶茶事件”，墨白公开回应了相关争议，并说明了事情经过。 据墨白介绍，当初前来购买账号的是一个陌生小号，而并非 Feifei 的常用账号。由于双方此前并无接触，他当时并不知道该账号实际归属，因此只是按照正常流程完成了交易。 墨白表示，直到后来 Feifei 主动公开聊天记录及用户名后，他才回查历史记录，确认当初购买账号的小号确实属于 Feifei。对于外界讨论的“奶茶”一事，墨白称，自己并未收取 Feifei 所说的奶茶，也不存在因一杯奶茶而给予特殊待遇或改变交易规则的情况。 对于事件后续的发展，墨白认为，既然当初选择使用小号完成交易，如今又多次以“转过奶茶钱”为由公开提及此事，甚至将其作为讨论焦点，难免会让外界对事件经过产生疑问，也容易引发对相关说法前后一致性的讨论。 此外，墨白表示，自己此前已删除频道内相关内容，本不打算继续回应此事。然而随着事件再次…
🔥6👏3👍2
保熟瓜棚🍉 pinned «🍉 今日吃瓜｜万人频道主 Feifei 再陷争议？ 最近 Emby 圈可谓一波未平、一波又起，这次的主角再次落到了万人频道主 Feifei 身上。 据社区讨论，Feifei 将鸢尾 Bot 内供用户使用的弹幕源发布至自己的频道，作为频道福利分享。大量用户集中使用后，相关弹幕源压力骤增，最终影响了鸢尾用户的正常使用，也因此引发了双方矛盾。 事件发生后，鸢尾一位管理在群内公开表达不满，双方随即爆发争执。而随着事件持续发酵，讨论的焦点也逐渐转向了“是否未经授权使用他人资源”。 有网友因此联想到此前的一件往事：当初…»
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @SureRipe. 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 — 671,019 of 1,183,361entries 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.
Named by 1 registered channel — 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.
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.
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 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“保熟瓜棚🍉” (@SureRipe), 2,837 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/SureRipe.
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.