4 measurements spanning 7 days, net +18. 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 1,871–1,895 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
13 Aug 2026, 07:18
1,892
+5
10 Aug 2026, 10:12
1,887
+12
7 Aug 2026, 02:32
1,875
+1
6 Aug 2026, 08:18
1,874
first reading
Engagement
21 posts held, back to 31 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 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
24.7%
avg views ÷ 1,892 subscribers
Avg views / post
467
21 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.28%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
21
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 19 of 21 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 7 August 2026
Posts held
21 (31 July 2026 – 7 August 2026)
Views total
9,797
Reactions total
124
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 17:23 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
Video runtime
2h 17m
Average length
34m 22s
Measured directly from 4 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
118 reactions across 18 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 69.5% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
82
69.5%
❤
14
11.9%
👌
8
6.78%
😁
6
5.08%
👎
4
3.39%
👏
2
1.69%
🔥
2
1.69%
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 19 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 124reactions 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 31 July 2026 to 7 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.
مقدمه: اسپینوزا، بزرگترین ویرانگر توهمات غایتشناسانه
باروخ اسپینوزا را میتوان بزرگترین فیلسوف ویرانگر توهمات غایتشناسانه در تاریخ فلسفه دانست. او استدلالی کلیدی و بنیادین ارائه میدهد مبنی بر اینکه طبیعت به هیچرو نمیتواند دارای غایت، هدف، یا طرح و تدبیری از پیش تعیینشده باشد. برای درک عمق و قدرت استدلال او، نخست باید اهمیت بنیادین این بحث را در دستگاه فکریاش به خوبی شناسایی کرد. از نظر اسپینوزا، نسبت دادن غا…
سطح دوم: نفی غایت برای اشیاء و اجزای طبیعت
به موازات نفی غایت از خداوند، اسپینوزا به طور نظاممند غایتمندی را از اشیاء و حالات متناهی طبیعت نیز سلب میکند. دلایل او در این سطح دوگانه است:
1. هستیشناسی حالات: اشیاء و موجودات متناهی، «جوهر» نیستند، بلکه «حالت» یا «جلوه»های خداوندند. آنها وجود و بقای خود را نه از خود، بلکه به طور کامل از جوهر الهی دارند. آنها به تعبیر اسپینوزا، «طبیعت طبیعتشده» هستند. یک حالت، در…
📌بخشی از کتاب اخلاق آزادی (The Ethics of Liberty)
♦️درآمدی بر حقوق طبیعی
✍🏻مورای روتبارد
🧩قسمت دوم
▪️یکی از انتقادهای رایج و تا حدی سطحی که مخالفان حقوق طبیعی مطرح میکنند این است: چه کسی قرار است این حقیقتهای ادعایی دربارهٔ انسان را تعیین کند؟
▪️پاسخ این پرسش «چه کسی» نیست، بلکه «چه چیزی» است: عقل انسان.
عقل انسان امری عینی (Objective) است؛ یعنی ابزاری است که همهٔ انسانها میتوانند از آن استفاده کنند و به کمک آ…
📗فرمانده
ونزوئلای هوگو چاوز
✒️روری کارول
داشتن یک شغل دولتی به معنای داشتن هویت، آب باریکه و امنیت بود. اگر شغلت را رها میکردی، ناگهان به یک فضای تهی سقوط میکردی، به همین دلیل است که بسیاری از بوروکراسیها، دیکتاتوریها، و امپراطوریها عمری چنین طولانی پیدا کردهاند.
فرمانده به این واقعیت واقف بود و لذا تا میتوانست بر تعداد وزارتخانهها، ادارات، برنامههای اجتماعی، شوراها، مجمعها، تعاونیها و غیره افزود.
امواج ب…
📌تلخ ترین نکته درباره فقر
✍🏻معین دهاز
📎بیپولی خیلی وقتها در حدی نیست که بقای انسان را تهدید کند. شما بدون داشتن ماشین و لباس خوب هم میتوانید به زندگی ادامه دهید؛ اما واقعیت اینقدر هم ساده نیست.
📎آلن دوباتن در کتاب خوبِ "اضطراب منزلت" به این پرسش میپردازد که شأن یک انسان به چه چیزهایی وابسته است؟! من بخاطر شغلم، بخاطر پول و یا ماشينم، چقدر در چشم دیگران محترم دیده میشوم؟ اصلا چرا بین "ثروت" و "منزلت" ر…
📌پروندهای برای لیبرالیسم
🧩قسمت سوم
🎙صوتی
اولین حکومت لیبرال
"چگونه دایکها زیربنای لیبرالیسم شدند"
📎 سومین قسمت به بررسی ویژگیهای مختلف نخستین حکومت لیبرال جهان، یعنی هلند قرن هفدهم پرداخته است.
📎در این زمان که اروپا زیر سلطه پادشاهان مطلقه و کلیسا اداره میشد، جمهوری هلند با رد سلطنت مطلقه، ساختاری غیرمتمرکز، جمهوریخواهانه و نمایندگی ایجاد کرد که قدرت را بین استانها، شهرها و مجالس محلی پخش کرده بود.
📎این مد…
📌بخشی از کتاب اخلاق آزادی (The Ethics of Liberty)
♦️درآمدی بر حقوق طبیعی
✍🏻موری روتبارد
🧩قسمت اول
◾۱. حقوق طبیعی و عقل
▪️امروزه در میان بسیاری از روشنفکرانی که خود را «علمگرا» میدانند، عبارت «طبیعت انسان» تقریباً همان واکنشی را برمیانگیزد که پارچهٔ قرمز در برابر یک گاو خشمگین. شعار رایج این دوران این است که: «انسان هیچ طبیعت ثابتی ندارد!»¹
▪️نمونهای از این نگرش را میتوان در سخنان یکی از نظریهپردازان برجستهٔ …
📌دیالوگ
مردم عادی معمولاً نه مهمن و نه مایهی نگرانی
اما هیچ وقت به کسی که با چنگ و دندون خودش رو به قدرت رسونده اعتماد نکن
🎥house of the dragon
#سینماهنر
📽 @andishee_noo 🍃
قانون
در طبیعت قانون وجود دارد. قانون طبیعی را نمیتوان زیر پا گذاشت و این نتوانستن جنبهٔ ارزشی ندارد. شما نمیتوانید با سرعتی که از حدی کمتر باشد، از گرانش زمین بگریزید، مگر آنکه قوانین مربوط به گرانش را بشناسید و با ابزاری خود را با آن تطبیق دهید. «قوی ضعیف را میخورد» خود یک قانون طبیعی است. اگر یک زیستبوم را به حال خود رها کنید، در آنجا یک گونهٔ جانوری دارای ویژگی خاصی که به دلیل همان ویژگی شکار بسیار دمدستی ب…
📗نظریههای منفی باف
چگونه پژوهش و کنشگری همه چیز را به نژاد و هویت ربط میدهد و چرا این مسئله به ضرر همه است
✒️هلن بلاکرز، جیمز لینزی
نظریه را نمیتوان نقد کرد.
لیبرالیسم به پیشرفت باور دارد؛ نظریه شدیداً نسبت به امکان پیشرفت منفیباف است.
لیبرالیسم به دلیل فرآیندهای تکاملی که بهوجود میآورد ذاتاً سازندهاست؛ نظریه به دلیل منفیبافی و اتصالش به روشهایی که آنها را «انتقادی» میخواند، ذاتاً تباه کننده است. جای تعج…
👍5
Signed کژال
Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @andishee_noo. 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 — 1,093,833 of 1,480,944entries 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
Named by 2 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.
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.
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.
“♟Liberty 🍃new idea” (@andishee_noo), 1,892 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/andishee_noo.
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.
