Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

UpScale

@UpScale_club

On this record: Also posting the same content · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

7,732subscribers

-20 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001872775109
TypeChannel
Username@UpScale_club
CreatedBetween 1 October 2022 and 30 September 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live13 August 2026
Measurements held4
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 13 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/UpScale_club

Also posting the same content

This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 2 other registered channels, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.

Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word 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.

Growth

7,7327,7537,742.56 August 2026 — 7,752 subscribers6 August 2026 — 7,753 subscribers9 August 2026 — 7,749 subscribers13 August 2026 — 7,732 subscribers6 August 202613 August 2026
4 measurements spanning 7 days, net -20. 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 7,729–7,756 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
13 Aug 2026, 04:247,732-17
9 Aug 2026, 17:517,749-4
6 Aug 2026, 22:407,753+1
6 Aug 2026, 05:347,752first reading

Engagement

21 posts held, back to 20 June 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 11 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
9.41%
avg views ÷ 7,732 subscribers
Avg views / post
727
6 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.96%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
6
of 21 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 5 of 6 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 August 2026
Posts held21 (20 June 202611 August 2026)
Views total4,364
Reactions total37
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken12 Aug 2026, 17:10 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

178 reactions across 20 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.6% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
7441.6%
🔥4927.5%
👍3821.3%
🫡42.25%
31.69%
31.69%
🤩21.12%
❤‍🔥10.562%
🐳10.562%
💯10.562%
🙏10.562%
🤓10.562%

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 20 of the 21 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 178reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 20 June 2026 to 11 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 21 we hold a reading for · 5%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @UpScale_club. 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 21 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 20 June 2026 to 11 August 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

11 Aug 2026, 11:43 UTC252 views5 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @ahr_ceo

Первый раз. Организационные и владельческие изменения последних лет привели к тому, что появился класс новых CEO - тех, кто впервые в этой роли (на российском рынке по разным оценкам эта цифра около 25%) Собрали опыт и 15 исследований в этой области и сформулировали 10 основных шагов для того, кто в первый раз. Они синтезируют исследования и практики перехода в другую лидерскую страту: сначала понять контекст и ож

🫡41

4 Aug 2026, 08:47 UTC510 viewsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @ahr_ceo

Внешний фасилитатор для топ-команды. Возник в одном чате вопрос про внешнего фасилитатора для сопровождения топ команды. Это полезная практика, если в команде сложное взаимодействие, много потерь эффективности и бесполезных обсуждений, никак не удается отстроить процесс принятия решений и др. Сделала короткую выжимку из своих комментариев к запросу: Я сама была со всех сторон такой работы - сопровождала топ-команд

28 Jul 2026, 07:08 UTC≈1,120 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Одна из нескольких интересных предварительных гипотез по исследованию рынка консалтинга. Роль консультанта постепенно смещается из автора решений - того, кто привносит лучшие практики в сторону экспертной валидации решений. Тут важно, что речь идет о смещении ожиданий, а не замещении роли. К авторской позиции консультантов в части выработки решений снижается доверие: «продают старый опыт, используют ИИ без фильтра»

2

23 Jul 2026, 15:08 UTC693 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @ahr_ceo

Зачем нам консалтинг? Помимо собственно реализации проектов, которые компании сегодня из экономии стараются закрывать собственными силами, консалтинг решает несколько системных задач для роста зрелости бизнеса. Немного истории: есть несколько переходов, связанных с консалтинговыми технологиями. Логика цикла выглядит так: кризис -> новая управленческая норма -> консалтинговая технология. Консалтинговые технологии -

2

22 Jul 2026, 04:32 UTC609 views16 reactions1 Starread 12 August 2026
Photo

Недавно на одном обучении меня спросили, сколько у меня контактов в телефоне. Я открыла записную книжку - и цифра оказалась весьма средней по группе. Но чем дольше я листала имена, тем больше понимала, что сама по себе эта цифра ничего не говорит о качестве сети. С одними людьми я общаюсь почти каждый день. Другим могу позвонить через три года - и мы продолжим ровно с того места, на котором когда-то остановились. Ч

113👍2

Signed Кожемякина (Мороз) Катерина

21 Jul 2026, 10:10 UTC≈1,180 views12 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Мышление, коммуникации и управление своим состоянием - три самых востребованных темы в работе с лидерскими командами. И, казалось бы, не новые. Но новые ракурсы в них появились, да и матчасть редко кто у себя выстраивант системно. Собрали, что почитать, чтобы собрать собственную картину. 1. Мышление критическое и системное, стратегическое и формирующее общую картину того, что команда делает. Что почитать? Донелла

6🔥5❤‍🔥1

16 Jul 2026, 04:05 UTC796 views6 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Пчелы и стратегия. Почему стратегия, которую все поняли, всё равно не взлетает? У Джонатана Хайдта есть метафора: человек на 90% шимпанзе и на 10% пчела. Большую часть времени мы действуем как отдельные личности (свои задачи, свои KPI, своя позиция). Но иногда включается пчелиный режим (hive), и группа вдруг начинает работать как единый организм. Вот эти 10% компаниям и здорово было бы включать - ровно тогда, когда

👍42

Signed Анна Паршина

15 Jul 2026, 08:38 UTC557 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @ahr_ceo

Вчера был интересный разговор, почему точечно на уровне доверия конкретному человеку мы видим спрос на part time executive (частичную занятость высоко-квалифицированных управленцев), а массово нет ни рынка, ни технологии. Начнем с того, что это дает: 1. В кризис, когда приоритет в эффективности, команде не хватает внешнего фокуса, чтобы увидеть за что нужно перестать держаться. 2. Когда решение не очевидно - чело

👍31

10 Jul 2026, 06:21 UTC651 views11 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @hrbaby_opsPhoto

Будущее - это завтра или через 10 лет? Интенсив, оффлайн, сентябрь, про Готовность к будущему - Future Ready на практике и в невероятной группе. Такое мы задумали давно и будем делать с Настей в сентябре. Если интересно, оставляйте реакцию в комментариях) А сегодня хочу поделиться с вами практиками, которые можно делать самостоятельно. Выходные впереди:) Вдохновившись книгой Imaginable Джейн Макгонигал, которая пр

11

Signed Анна Паршина

9 Jul 2026, 04:32 UTC623 views21 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

В юности одним из писателей, который произвел на меня очень сильное впечатление, был Александр Беляев. Его роман «Голова профессора Доуэля» оставил очень странное чувство -смесь ужаса и восхищения. Неужели такое вообще возможно? Может ли человеческий интеллект существовать отдельно от личности? Тогда это казалось чистой фантастикой, а сейчас это не кажется таким нереальным. Напомню сюжет. После смерти профессора Д

🔥173👍1

Signed Кожемякина (Мороз) Катерина

7 Jul 2026, 12:23 UTC727 views15 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

Хааланд, MVC и ваше живое. У норвежских болельщиков на чемпионате мира появилась своя странная, смешная и очень быстро узнаваемая штука - Viking Row. Люди садятся рядами и начинают синхронно «грести», как будто они не на футбольном матче, а в драккаре, который внезапно причалил к стадиону. Выглядит немного нелепо, немного прекрасно, быстро подхватывается и очень узнаваемо. По сети уже разлетелось куча фоток, где даж

🔥9👍5🐳1

Signed Анна Паршина

6 Jul 2026, 17:24 UTC624 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @ahr_ceo

По мотивам нескольких встреч за последнюю неделю решила собрать “карту” того, с чем полезно поработать лидерским командам сегодня, отвечая на вопрос как наша лидерская команда может улучшиться? и где мы можем быть вам в этом полезны: 1. Коммуникации: Мы не можем договориться, много скрытых мотивов и недоговоренностей, или мы слишком на все соглашаемся. * PCM - модель коммуникации, которая позволяет простым и понятны

2

Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @UpScale_club. 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.

Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 108,786 of 1,480,688entries 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.

Forward network

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 11 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.

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 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“UpScale” (@UpScale_club), 7,732 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/UpScale_club.

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.