Education — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 12 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 98% 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.
Growth
27 measurements spanning 95 days, net -180. 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 6,130–6,374 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 27
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
10 Nov 2026, 20:58
6,158
-14
7 Nov 2026, 11:31
6,172
-21
4 Nov 2026, 03:14
6,193
-9
31 Oct 2026, 19:11
6,202
+3
28 Oct 2026, 10:26
6,199
-8
25 Oct 2026, 09:06
6,207
-2
22 Oct 2026, 13:36
6,209
-6
18 Oct 2026, 21:47
6,215
-3
16 Oct 2026, 06:07
6,218
-9
12 Oct 2026, 19:39
6,227
-7
6 Oct 2026, 05:57
6,234
-11
29 Sept 2026, 07:17
6,245
-7
19 Sept 2026, 07:40
6,252
-12
14 Sept 2026, 10:37
6,264
-6
10 Sept 2026, 19:16
6,270
-9
5 Sept 2026, 23:22
6,279
-13
1 Sept 2026, 19:45
6,292
-1
29 Aug 2026, 20:11
6,293
-6
26 Aug 2026, 21:25
6,299
-15
24 Aug 2026, 02:02
6,314
first reading
Engagement
28 posts held, back to 28 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 14 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
10.4%
avg views ÷ 6,158 subscribers
Avg views / post
640
2 posts measured
Reaction rate
8.75%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
2
of 28 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 6 November 2026
Posts held
28 (28 November 2025 – 6 November 2026)
Views total
1,280
Reactions total
112
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
6 Nov 2026, 16:40 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
1,033 reactions across 27 posts, in 18 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 30.2% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
312
30.2%
🔥
209
20.2%
🤓
161
15.6%
😎
84
8.13%
🤡
71
6.87%
😁
69
6.68%
💅
31
3.00%
✍
30
2.90%
custom 5264887884871126578
20
1.94%
🤩
13
1.26%
👍
12
1.16%
🏆
6
0.581%
custom 5168273390116536817
4
0.387%
👏
4
0.387%
😍
4
0.387%
custom 5355166499705204806
1
0.097%
❤🔥
1
0.097%
💯
1
0.097%
Custom emoji. 3 of the rows above are Telegram custom emoji, which the public preview renders as an element carrying only a numeric id — no character, and no image we can reach. The id is printed as-is rather than substituted with a look-alike glyph, because a stand-in would be our invention showing where a measurement should be. The counts beside them are Telegram’s.
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 27 of the 28 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 1,033 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 28 most recent posts we hold, published 28 November 2025 to 6 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
3
across the posts below
Posts paid on
3
of 28 we hold a reading for · 11%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @andron_233. 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 28 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 28 November 2025 to 6 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 0 of 2 posts held from the last 30 days (0%) 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).
В подтверждение этой штуки, кстати, буквально случайно только что наткнулся на статью, про то, что, в отличие от многих профессий (в том числе айтишных), вакансий по Data Engineering становится только больше.
Статья американская, не все 1-1 применимо к РФ рынку, но в целом вижу ровно ту же тенденцию. Да это на самом деле и логично — сразу несколько факторов этому способствуют:
1. За последние пару лет компании силь…
Давно не писал в канал — каждый раз говорю, что исправлюсь, но очень много работы, извините)) Исправлюсь 😄
Я тут что подумал. Не знаю, как вы, а я последний год живу в абсолютном AI-пузыре. Ну то есть изо всех утюгов кричат про ИИшки, их возможности, вайбкодинг, какая революция случилась и насколько теперь стало проще жить.
Правда ли это? Да, правда. Действительно, многие задачи делать стало сильно быстрей и проще,…
Новый канал ❕
Душа требует говорить не только про аналитическое, но и про предпринимательское — маркетинг, продажи, управление, батхерт из-за роста налогов и многое другое. Поэтому, чтобы не мешать все в кучу, я завел для этого отдельный канал!
Там честно рассказываю про свой предпринимательский путь — как развиваю бизнесы, как запускаю новые проекты, как сажусь в лужу (надеюсь такого будет поменьше 🤓) и просто вся…
Ну что, выкладываю обещанный пост про выбор неправильных пороговых значений!
Часто при проведении аналитики нам приходится задавать некоторые «критерии» вручную. Это довольно субъективная штука, так что ошибиться очень легко. И в то же время цена ошибки может быть очень большой, потому что именно от этого зависят конечные управленческие выводы.
Несколько примеров таких «критериев»:
— Как выбрать пороговые значения…
Хотите оказаться в такой же шикарной шляпе уже через 2 года? Тогда надо пойти в магистратуру в этом году)))
И совершенно случайно у нас в Симулейтив есть такая магистратура, представляете? Называется «Аналитика и инженерия данных». С дипломом МИФИ еще на выходе.
Так сегодня еще и прием документов заканчивается, шанса залететь больше не будет. Кто не успеет — такую шляпу уже только через 3 года получит. Вот так.
Ус…
В прошлом июне я писал личный пост о том, что меня прям торкнуло, когда мы анонсировали запуск совместной магистратуры с МИФИ. В потоке рабочих задач не замечаешь, как жизнь вокруг меняется — а в тот момент оглянулся и вдруг увидел, как большой путь мы прошли: от первой демо-версии нашего курса в гугл-доке до совместной маги с ТОП-2 ВУЗом страны!
Прошло чуть больше года, и все опять незаметно поменялось. Год был объ…
Приходите сегодня в 19 мск на открытый эфир со мной!
1. Будем практиковаться: писать SQL-запросы и строить дашборд для руководителя
2. Поговорим про рынок труда — какие коррективы вносит развитие ИИ, кризис и отсутствие бензина 🤡
3. Поговорим про карьеру — расскажу, как можно стать аналитиком за 10 недель
Плюс для всех участников подготовили бонус — дополнительная домашка по мотивам того, что разберем на занятии!
…
В продолжение темы по временным рядам — иногда умение работать с ними помогает решать и другие, сильно более утилитарные задачки.
Например, недавно я проводил вебинар, где на примере оценки рекламных кампаний показывал концепцию прокси-метрик. Идея простая — иногда у нас тупо нет времени/денег тестировать рекламу и ждать результат «в деньгах» (ну то есть как наши заявки с рекламы сконвертируются в оплату). И чтобы у…
🔥6❤4✍2🤩1😎1
Showing the 12 most recent of 28 posts we hold for @andron_233. 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.
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.
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.
Noukash @noukashblog · 21,576 Telegram ranks this channel #16 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 23 September 2026
Клуб анонимных аналитиков @analyst_club · 33,307 Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 4 September 2026
Reveal the Data @revealthedata · 27,662 Telegram ranks this channel #19 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 10 September 2026
LEFT JOIN @leftjoin · 41,459 Telegram ranks this channel #19 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 29 August 2026
настенька и графики @nastengraph · 28,082 Telegram ranks this channel #20 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 9 September 2026
karpov.courses @KarpovCourses · 27,313 Telegram ranks this channel #25 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 10 September 2026
Инжиниринг Данных @rockyourdata · 23,679 Telegram ranks this channel #31 of 93 here — alongside 92 others — read 17 September 2026
This channel appears in 7 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. 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.
“ANDRON ALEXANYAN” (@andron_233), 6,158 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/andron_233.
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.