Crypto & trading — 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 20 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 95% 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 12 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. 35 of the 37 matches recorded here fall after that date and carried no header when we read them. The rest predate reliable capture and are not evidence either way.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 690 comparable posts for this entry, running 5 August 2026 to 11 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 keys clone_copy · clone_mutual · clone_source, last confirmed 12 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
64 measurements spanning 97 days, net -1,798. 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 47,900–50,238 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 64
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
10 Nov 2026, 23:47
48,170
-15
9 Nov 2026, 12:57
48,185
-38
8 Nov 2026, 01:20
48,223
-33
6 Nov 2026, 20:56
48,256
-17
5 Nov 2026, 23:16
48,273
-12
5 Nov 2026, 00:56
48,285
-36
4 Nov 2026, 01:08
48,321
-4
2 Nov 2026, 22:07
48,325
+1
1 Nov 2026, 21:51
48,324
-16
31 Oct 2026, 23:35
48,340
-6
30 Oct 2026, 22:29
48,346
-17
29 Oct 2026, 19:39
48,363
-23
28 Oct 2026, 21:37
48,386
-22
27 Oct 2026, 17:39
48,408
-24
26 Oct 2026, 17:46
48,432
-7
25 Oct 2026, 16:41
48,439
-13
24 Oct 2026, 18:19
48,452
-20
23 Oct 2026, 18:55
48,472
-28
22 Oct 2026, 17:21
48,500
-30
21 Oct 2026, 12:12
48,530
first reading
Engagement
2,240 posts held, back to 5 August 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 197 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
5.22%
avg views ÷ 48,170 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,510
710 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.182%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
710
of 2,240 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 440 of 710 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
2,240 (5 August 2026 – 11 November 2026)
Views total
1,784,075
Reactions total
2,090
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Nov 2026, 00:48 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
≈46,800
Videos
≈1,190
Links
≈29,900
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 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
5m 16s
Average length
13s
Measured directly from 24 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
3,541 reactions across 635 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 63.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
2,254
63.7%
👍
861
24.3%
🔥
262
7.40%
👏
133
3.76%
🥰
31
0.875%
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 683 of the 1,000 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 3,541 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 29 September 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
30
across the posts below
Posts paid on
20
of 1,000 we hold a reading for · 2%
Most on one post
5
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @WeCryptoTogether. 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 1,000 most recent posts we hold for this entry (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 29 September 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.
Advertising
Ad load
0.1%
1 of 1,000 posts carry an ad marker
Regulatory tokens
0
none — marked by hashtag only
Median views · ads
2,070
over 1 measured post
Median views · rest
2,410
over 999 measured posts
An ad marker, not a judgement about a post. A post is counted here because it carries one of two explicit markings: an erid token, which Russian law has required on paid placements since 2022 and which is issued against a specific advertising contract, or a #реклама / #ad hashtag in the body, which is the channel declaring it itself. The first is documentary; the second is a self-declaration and is weaker. No classifier reads the text and decides — nothing on this site guesses that a post is an advertisement.
This is a floor, and it can only ever be a floor. A channel that runs paid placements without marking them produces no marker for us to count, and an unmarked ad is indistinguishable from an ordinary post on the public surface. The ad load above therefore means “the share of posts that declared themselves”, never “the share of posts that were paid for”. A low figure is not evidence of a channel that runs few ads.
Both figures are medians, and no ratio between them is published. Each is a view reading that actually occurred on a post, picked by percentile_disc rather than averaged, so one viral post cannot move it and no interpolated value is invented between two readings. The sample on one side is under five posts, which is too thin to compare. The two figures are shown side by side with the count behind each, and deliberately not divided into a headline like “ads get x% fewer views” — an arithmetic that is easy to print and, at this sample size, means nothing.
Measured over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 29 September 2026 to 11 November 2026. Views are the latest single reading held for each post, and any reading at or above 1,000 is rounded by Telegram to three significant figures.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 123 of 710 posts held from the last 30 days (17.3%) 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).
📈 난항을 겪던 OKXICE가 결국 11월 23일날 출범을 하긴 하네요?
출처
어제 $SECZ 가 부진한 실적발표에도 왜 올랐나 했는데 이 소식을 미리 안 사람들이 프론트러닝을 한게 아닐까 싶네요.
이전에도 언급했지만 OKXICE는 SPV 방식이 아닌 TSV라는 진또배기 토큰화 주식으로 거래되는데, 이걸 Securitize가 담당합니다.
그리고 제가 알기론 이거 할 수 있는 기업 시큐리타이즈밖에 없어요.
그럼에도 불구하고 저는 다음달부터 유통량 2배가 풀리는 언락이 무서워서 올라타고 싶진 않네요.
흐름 자체도 한 번 랠리 보여주고 다시 고점 근처에서 비비는 단계라..물리면 진짜 아플 것 같음.
Showing the 12 most recent of 2,240 posts we hold for @WeCryptoTogether. 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
@WeCryptoTogether edited 2 posts 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
18 October 2026
Most recent edit
28 October 2026
Posts recorded as deleted after publishing
We recorded 1 post on @WeCryptoTogether 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
9 August 2026
Most recent seen missing
9 August 2026
Median time before seen missing
43 hours
Seen missing in the last 30 days
0
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republished by 201 registered channels. The 48 listed are the ones that have forwarded the most posts; the rest are counted here but not each listed.
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 78 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. The 24 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
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
3
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
3
vacant every time we have ever looked
@WeCryptoTogether named 3 handles 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.
@bums7120 named in 1 post, 2 November 2026 – 2 November 2026
@metamask named in 1 post, 2 October 2026 – 2 October 2026
@edward__park named in 1 post, 23 August 2026 – 23 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.
DeFi 농부 👨🏻🌾 조선생 @BSC_Farmer_KR · 20,255 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 26 September 2026
변창호 코인사관학교 BCH @BChoSN · 26,326 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 15 September 2026
불개미 CRYPTO @fireant_crypto · 32,703 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 4 September 2026
취미생활방📮 @enjoymyhobby · 48,840 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 92 here — alongside 91 others — read 25 August 2026
텔레그램 코인 방,채널 - CEN @emperorcoin · 35,511 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 19 August 2026
졸업준비위원회🎓 @officialunivercityofcrypto · 22,657 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 19 September 2026
새우잡이어선 공지방 @shrimp_notice · 28,311 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 9 September 2026
해달의 투자 정보 공유 @seaotterbtc · 29,999 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 7 September 2026
코인 갤러리(Coin gallery) @dogeland01 · 20,904 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 24 September 2026
잼민123🦅 @mujammin123 · 25,756 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 13 September 2026
에어드랍ATM @Bounty_ATM · 25,805 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 79 here — alongside 78 others — read 14 September 2026
디지털자산/AI/경제(케이씨지) @coinkcgchannel · 15,339 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 5 October 2026
30대에 은퇴번복한 머피 @murphybus · 19,905 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 28 September 2026
폐지줍기 연구소 @airdr0p_lab · 20,455 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 26 September 2026
에어드랍코리아 (Airdropkorea) @airdrop_kor · 21,269 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 24 September 2026
🔥요블이 세상살이🔥 @yobeullyANN · 22,207 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 21 September 2026
차분남(차트분석하는남자) @chavoonnam · 21,088 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 80 here — alongside 79 others — read 24 September 2026
신기술은 돈이 된다 공지방 @tlsrltnf · 22,355 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 20 September 2026
기분좋은 마곤 @magonia_b · 26,189 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 11 September 2026
마샬 공유방 2.0 @marshallog · 21,370 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 22 September 2026
갓물주 (코인정보, 돈되는거) @godmulzoo · 22,634 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 19 September 2026
ZAP Tech News @zaponblast · 62,962 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 21 August 2026
Gram 🇰🇷 @toncoin_kr · 22,951 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 30 September 2026
Layergg exchange & project alert @layergg · 19,298 Telegram ranks this channel #19 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 1 October 2026
This channel appears in 42 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. 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 10 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“코인같이투자 정보 에어드랍🦋” (@WeCryptoTogether), 48,170 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/WeCryptoTogether.
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.
