3 measurements spanning 3 days, net +24. 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 1,123–1,155 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
9 Aug 2026, 23:32
1,151
+24
7 Aug 2026, 05:59
1,127
no change
6 Aug 2026, 22:02
1,127
first reading
Engagement
19 posts held, back to 12 November 2025 — 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 · 30 days
27.1%
avg views ÷ 1,151 subscribers
Avg views / post
312
1 post measured
Reaction rate
5.45%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1
of 19 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 24 July 2026
Posts held
19 (12 November 2025 – 24 July 2026)
Views total
312
Reactions total
17
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
6 Aug 2026, 22:02 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.
Reaction mix
247 reactions across 17 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 17.4% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
43
17.4%
👍
43
17.4%
🔥
36
14.6%
👀
31
12.6%
👎
24
9.72%
👏
22
8.91%
😱
13
5.26%
😭
12
4.86%
⚡
5
2.02%
😢
5
2.02%
🥰
4
1.62%
❤🔥
2
0.81%
🤔
2
0.81%
🤬
2
0.81%
😎
1
0.405%
🤮
1
0.405%
🥱
1
0.405%
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 17 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 247reactions 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 12 November 2025 to 24 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.
👋 Tienes un canal popular: @UniversalForks. Ahora puedes personalizar su apariencia para que tu canal se destaque.
Estas funciones son exclusivas y requieren que tu canal alcance un nivel específico para acceder a ellas. Simplemente pídele a tus suscriptores impulsar el canal usando este enlace: https://t.me/UniversalForks?boost. A medida que tu canal reciba más impulsos, subirá de nivel y cada nivel desbloquea bene…
Esto incluye la venta del cliente:
- Código fuente en Github: MDGram Messenger
- Canal oficial de MDGram con 21.000 seguidores
- Grupo oficial de MDGram
- Canal de temas de MDGram
🚀 #MDGram está a la venta
Debido al mensaje publicado hace unos días en su canal oficial, es posible que el proyecto pase a otro equipo que dé continuidad al fork.
Recordemos que la actualización V21 de MDGram fue el 6 de mayo de 2024 (hace más de 2 años). Además, el proyecto fue puesto en pausa hasta nuevo aviso.
Si el cliente reanuda su desarrollo será re-añadido a la lista de forks.
Este es el mensaje traducid…
A ver, confirmemos lo que acaba de pasar:
Nekogram admitió que: "La respuesta es sí, los números fueron enviados al bot. Algunas personas piden una explicación, pero que tipo de explicación necesitas? es exactamente lo que parece, es lo que es"
Luego procedió a decir que los números no fueron compartidos con nadie y así pero ... eso no es una respuesta aceptable 😁
En resumen: admite parcialmente lo que fue encontr…
Este post reenviado parece que lo borraron 😁
Bueno, ese bot es un bot muy útil que permite encontrar mejores resultados de búsqueda que la forma nativa de Telegram
En la acusación a Neko, se encontró referencias a que usan dicho bot, los devs han dicho que parece que lo están usando de forma automatizada y sin su consentimiento, que no están relacionados ni afiliados con Nekogram bajo ningún concepto.
Parece que Nekogram está utilizando el bot de búsqueda de TgDB de forma automatizada (sin nuestro conocimiento; no se trata de una colaboración), probablemente para buscar nombres de usuario.
Sin embargo, esto no tiene nada que ver con su recopilación encubierta de números de teléfono; no recibimos ningún dato de Nekogram y no tenemos ningún tipo de relación con ellos.
🔗 TgDB News (TelegramDB)
Traducido por @Unive…
EXPUESTO: Evidencia en el código fuente de la recopilación de números de teléfono por parte de Nekogram
1. Lógica de exfiltración: La función uo5.g() (reconstruida como logNumberPhones) recopila de forma silenciosa el ID de usuario y el número de teléfono de todas las cuentas que han iniciado sesión en la app (hasta 8 cuentas).
2. Transmisión: Los datos se envían mediante consultas inline al bot @nekonotificationbo…
Nekogram está transmitiendo en secreto el número de teléfono de tu cuenta de Telegram al desarrollador
Según SOTA,
"La puerta trasera está oculta en el archivo http://Extra.java, que difiere de la plantilla subida al repositorio. El código ofuscado envía datos como una solicitud en línea a @nekonotificationbot, sin dejar rastro. El mismo archivo implementa el 'doxing' de cuentas a través de varios bots; es posible q…
👀10
Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @UniversalForks. 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.
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.
¿Borramos a Nekogram de la lista de forks por sus prácticas cuestionables de privacidad?
Sí87%
No8%
Me es indiferente5%
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 19 most recent posts we hold, published 12 November 2025 to 24 July 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
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
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.
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 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Universal Forks” (@UniversalForks), 1,151 subscribers as measured 9 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/UniversalForks.
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.