Other / unclassifiable — 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 21 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 80% 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 3 other registered channels. 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. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 73 comparable posts for this entry, running 30 July 2026 to 10 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).
Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 11 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.
Growth
65 measurements spanning 95 days, net +5,450. 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 50,131–57,549 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 65
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
9 Nov 2026, 23:35
56,437
-53
8 Nov 2026, 14:46
56,490
+1
7 Nov 2026, 06:44
56,489
-112
6 Nov 2026, 05:31
56,601
-30
5 Nov 2026, 07:29
56,631
-5
4 Nov 2026, 06:18
56,636
-1
3 Nov 2026, 08:20
56,637
-56
2 Nov 2026, 08:30
56,693
+79
1 Nov 2026, 08:05
56,614
+78
31 Oct 2026, 11:16
56,536
+70
30 Oct 2026, 14:19
56,466
+68
29 Oct 2026, 15:08
56,398
+54
28 Oct 2026, 17:00
56,344
+84
27 Oct 2026, 19:10
56,260
+65
26 Oct 2026, 16:06
56,195
+91
25 Oct 2026, 13:00
56,104
+93
24 Oct 2026, 15:05
56,011
+57
23 Oct 2026, 15:48
55,954
+42
22 Oct 2026, 18:39
55,912
+43
21 Oct 2026, 14:30
55,869
first reading
Engagement
227 posts held, back to 30 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 205 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
12.4%
avg views ÷ 56,437 subscribers
Avg views / post
7,000
66 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.58%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
66
of 227 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. It is computed over the 60 of 66 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 November 2026
Posts held
227 (30 July 2026 – 11 November 2026)
Views total
461,675
Reactions total
7,240
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
11 Nov 2026, 08:52 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
Photos
≈15,400
Videos
≈4,850
Links
≈90
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 11 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
Video runtime
20m 00s
Average length
18s
Measured directly from 65 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.
Reaction mix
20,953 reactions across 183 posts, in 9 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 70.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
14,721
70.3%
🥰
2,896
13.8%
👍
1,573
7.51%
❤🔥
756
3.61%
🍓
288
1.37%
💘
212
1.01%
💔
204
0.974%
😢
174
0.83%
👀
129
0.616%
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 184 of the 227 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 20,953 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 227 most recent posts we hold, published 30 July 2026 to 11 November 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
14
across the posts below
Posts paid on
9
of 227 we hold a reading for · 4%
Most on one post
3
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @TimeChay. 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 227 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 30 July 2026 to 11 November 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 0 of 66 posts held from the last 30 days (0%) 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).
به جای تماشای پنجره ی زندگی دیگران
از کتاب عمرت لذت ببر.
داشتههایت را جلوی چشمانت قاب بگیر و برای نداشتههایت تلاش کن.
حسرت باغچه دیگران را نخور.
در عوض باغبان دنیای خودت باش.
امروزت آرام♥️🫧
خدايا...
نمیدونم تهش قراره چی بشه
ولی خيلی دلم به معجزه هات محتاجه؛
به یه نشونه، یه اتفاق خوب که بیاد
و حال دلمون رو از این رو به اون رو کنه.
ما چشم انتظاریم؛
چون میدونیم تو هیچوقت ناامیدمون نميکنی
صبح اول هفته بخیر ☺️❤️
واقعا چی دلچسب تر از یه خورشت آلوی جا افتاده اونم تو یه ظهر پاییزی ➖
دستور پخت:
من برای درست کردنش پیاز رو نگینی خرد میکنم تفتش میدم گوشت رو بهش اضافه میکنم یکم که تفت خورد نمک و زردچوبه میزنم رب گوجه فرنگیمو جدا سرخش میکنم و به گوشت اضافش میکنم حالا آلوهایی که از دو ساعت قبل خیس خوردن رو بهش اضافه میکنم چهار لیوان آب میریزم و با شعله ی ملایم اجازه میدم بپزه و جا بیفته بعداز پختن گوشت یک استکان پر زعفران دم کرده اضا…
Showing the 12 most recent of 227 posts we hold for @TimeChay. 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
@TimeChay edited 1 post 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
10 October 2026
Most recent edit
10 October 2026
Posts recorded as deleted after publishing
We recorded 22 posts on @TimeChay 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
21 August 2026
Most recent seen missing
4 November 2026
Median time before seen missing
3 days
Seen missing in the last 30 days
11
Polls
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100. Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 227 most recent posts we hold, published 30 July 2026 to 11 November 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Forward network
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.
Mentions
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.
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
0
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
1
vacant every time we have ever looked
@TimeChay 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.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@freebook named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
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 25 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.
نوستالژی @Nostalzhi · 22,504 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 62 here — alongside 61 others — read 20 September 2026
کافه ریلکس @CafeReIax · 43,674 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 78 here — alongside 77 others — read 27 August 2026
hess_ziba @hess_ziba · 3 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 73 here — alongside 72 others — read 27 August 2026
ژیوا @ZhiwaChannel · 19,055 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 69 here — alongside 68 others — read 3 October 2026
حقایق باستان ™️ @Ancient_factt · 37,250 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 31 August 2026
دکتر سارا ناصرزاده @Dr_zana6oei · 48,500 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 60 here — alongside 59 others — read 25 August 2026
Roga magazine مجله رگا @rogamag · 27,716 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 72 here — alongside 71 others — read 11 September 2026
[ 𝒁𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒈𝒊 𝒗𝒂 𝒎𝒂𝒏 ] @Dreaam_life · 72,654 Telegram ranks this channel #19 of 54 here — alongside 53 others — read 25 August 2026
مورفین @MorphineTel · 40,900 Telegram ranks this channel #24 of 77 here — alongside 76 others — read 29 August 2026
BOOK | کتاب @BooksCom · 60,548 Telegram ranks this channel #25 of 80 here — alongside 79 others — read 21 August 2026
خوشبختے هاے کوچک ☕️ @Dlkhoosh · 100,113 Telegram ranks this channel #28 of 55 here — alongside 54 others — read 17 August 2026
صدا و سکوت @SoundSilence · 119,041 Telegram ranks this channel #28 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 14 August 2026
Matn Plus(متن پلاس) @matnpluss · 21,784 Telegram ranks this channel #29 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 20 September 2026
Radio Music | موزیک جدید @RadiofyMusic · 57,392 Telegram ranks this channel #30 of 58 here — alongside 57 others — read 22 August 2026
ایران زیبای من♥️🌹My Beautiful Iran @vivakowreh · 23,349 Telegram ranks this channel #38 of 66 here — alongside 65 others — read 18 September 2026
ژلوفن | gelofen @GELOFEN · 31,299 Telegram ranks this channel #39 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 5 September 2026
استوری خاص @StoryeKhas · 98,012 Telegram ranks this channel #43 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 15 August 2026
🍃💞حس"زیبا"💞🍃 @hesseziba33 · 24,133 Telegram ranks this channel #58 of 67 here — alongside 66 others — read 16 September 2026
Text / Profile 🥀 @ttext_Profile · 28,650 Telegram ranks this channel #61 of 70 here — alongside 69 others — read 8 September 2026
استوری♡› @estori_instam · 44,422 Telegram ranks this channel #69 of 72 here — alongside 71 others — read 24 August 2026
|مجله هُنری زَرد| @rang_zard · 30,015 Telegram ranks this channel #73 of 83 here — alongside 82 others — read 7 September 2026
This channel appears in 21 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Cite this entry
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 9 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“بوقت چای” (@TimeChay), 56,437 subscribers as measured 9 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/TimeChay.
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.
