Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Vampire Six

@VampireSix

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

3,931subscribers

-22 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-1001620985890
TypeChannel
Username@VampireSix
Created17 April 2022measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held5
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/VampireSix

Growth

3,9313,9533,9426 August 2026 — 3,953 subscribers6 August 2026 — 3,953 subscribers6 August 2026 — 3,951 subscribers9 August 2026 — 3,941 subscribers12 August 2026 — 3,931 subscribers6 August 202612 August 2026
5 measurements spanning 6 days, net -22. 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 3,928–3,956 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 10:053,931-10
9 Aug 2026, 11:323,941-10
6 Aug 2026, 17:003,951-2
6 Aug 2026, 10:473,953no change
6 Aug 2026, 09:573,953first reading

Engagement

10 posts held, back to 25 June 2024the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 4 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 10 posts for this entry, the most recent from 14 February 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.

What this channel posts

Video runtime
19s
Average length
19s

Measured directly from 1 video 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

756 reactions across 10 posts, in 29 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 30.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍23330.8%
14819.6%
💯9011.9%
🤣699.13%
🔥415.42%
😁354.63%
283.70%
🤮151.98%
🥰151.98%
🌭121.59%
🗿111.46%
🫡111.46%
🦄91.19%
🤪81.06%
🌚50.661%
👀50.661%
👌50.661%
20.265%
👎20.265%
😱20.265%
9 further kinds101.32%

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 10 of the 10 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 756reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 10 most recent posts we hold, published 25 June 2024 to 14 February 2025, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

14 Feb 2025, 22:32 UTC≈7,090 views104 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Photo

Telegram waifu exclusive!

71👍15🦄6🌭4👌4🤯2🤓1🤮1

Signed Armchair Warlord

14 Feb 2025, 17:59 UTC≈6,860 views32 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @ZornkriegerPhoto

Pictures 11-12

👍20🔥93

Signed Armchair Warlord

14 Feb 2025, 17:59 UTC≈5,760 views31 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @ZornkriegerPhoto

Pictures are in order. 1-10

👍19🔥741

Signed Armchair Warlord

14 Feb 2025, 17:58 UTC≈4,600 views46 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @Zornkrieger

1 Moskva - sunk 2 Makarov - damage claims are dubious at best, the ship is fully functional and operating today even though multiple pro-Ukrainians on numerous occasions have claimed it was sunk or damaged beyond repair. 3 Saratov - sunk 4 Minsk - potential slight damage, ship was in port at the time. Not sunk. Pic. 1 5 Olenegorskiy Gornyak - returned to service. Not sunk. Picture of the ship in harbor on Septemb

👍30🔥843🆒1

Signed Armchair Warlord

14 Feb 2025, 17:58 UTC≈3,750 views29 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @ZornkriegerPhoto

See my below breakdown of this Ukrainian infographic used to claim they have “devastated” the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

🔥17👍741

Signed Armchair Warlord

7 Feb 2025, 18:14 UTC≈4,680 views214 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Photo

I should post here more often.

👍117💯5915🥰11👀52🌚21

Signed Armchair Warlord

7 Jul 2024, 02:19 UTC≈12,500 views103 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @SlavyangradPhoto

The cost of replacing the US Air Force's outdated nuclear arsenal has risen by almost $65 billion, Reuters reports, citing sources. Costs for Northrop Grumman's next-generation Sentinel ICBM project rose from $95.8 billion to $160 billion. - noted in the publication. According to one of the agency's sources, the new costs could force the Pentagon to reduce the scope of the program or the timing of its implementatio

🤣64👍14🗿115🦄3🤮2😱2😁1

Signed Armchair Warlord

5 Jul 2024, 13:05 UTC≈9,650 views58 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @SlavyangradPhoto

This week the NY Times just casually dropped that the official U.S. intelligence assessment has always been that Putin didn't want to expand the Ukraine conflict beyond Ukraine. But in public, Biden and other U.S officials have been pushing a domino theory that if we negotiated an end to the war Russia would invade Poland and beyond. Biden led off the State of the Union with that claim! - Marcus Stanley, Analyst at

💯31129👍4🕊1😡1

Signed Armchair Warlord

4 Jul 2024, 19:43 UTC≈7,240 views82 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @CultureWarRoomPhoto

Happy 4th of July.

41🤮12🫡11🌭8🥰4👎2😁2👍1

Signed Armchair Warlord

25 Jun 2024, 05:14 UTC≈8,470 views57 reactionsread 8 August 2026
Forwarded from @i20028843Video

🥇This couldn't have been timed better☝️ 🙃 Ukrainians give Baghdad Bob a run for his money... When the interviewer (square head, jug ears) decides to interview a Ukrainian energy company executive to reassure the remaining Ukro public ... it plays out like a comedy sketch "We are successfully managing all challenges in the country's energy system.💡" "Sorry we lost him due to an electricity shortage.....👀" AHAHAH

😁32🤪8👍6🤣5🌚321

Signed Armchair Warlord

Showing the 10 most recent of 10 posts we hold for @VampireSix. 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

Citation-graph rank — 833,774 of 1,160,990entries 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

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

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

“Vampire Six” (@VampireSix), 3,931 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/VampireSix.

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.