Channel
@antiannihilationism
On this record: Growth ยท Engagement ยท What this channel posts ยท Reactions ยท Posts ยท Polls ยท Citations ยท Cite this entry
160subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register ยท movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002192630113 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @antiannihilationism |
| Description | The Official Telegram Channel of Anti Annihilationism Join the friend channels get meme-warfare ammunition: @EndinessCompendium |
| Created | Between 1 June 2024 and 30 September 2024โ estimated from Telegramโs id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 14 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/antiannihilationism |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Aug 2026, 17:15 | 160 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 13:37 | 160 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 28 November 2025 โ the reader has not yet reached the start of this channelโs public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegramโs post history, 20 posts per page.
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) รท viewsโ note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegramโs 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 3 of 6 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days ยท latest post in window 4 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (28 November 2025 โ 4 August 2026) |
| Views total | 192 |
| Reactions total | 3 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface โ not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 17:15 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 โcorrectingโ the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form โ 8.12K, 3.7M โ 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 โ read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Lifetime counters from Telegramโs own channel header, read 8 August 2026 โ not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegramโs rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
Measured directly from 14 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel โ not this channelโs 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 Telegramโs own rounded chrome, so it carries no โ mark.
24 reactions across 11 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 50.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ๐ | 12 | 50.0% | |
| ๐ | 5 | 20.8% | |
| ๐ฅ | 4 | 16.7% | |
| ๐ | 2 | 8.33% | |
| โก | 1 | 4.17% |
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 โ ๐ is thanks in one channel and mourning in another โ 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 โ 4.34K, 1.2M โ 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 11 of the 20 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegramโs own count on each post โ not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above โ those same posts carry 24reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by โa reaction total printed elsewhere on the pageโ.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 28 November 2025 to 4 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.
Jesus went to Hell, and somehow Hell doesn't exist? ๐๐ซ๐ฑ๐ฆ ๐๐ฏ๐ฌ๐ซ๐ค ๐๐๐ถ ๐๐ก๐ณ๐ข๐ซ๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ฐ๐ช | ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ฌ๐ณ๐๐ฅ'๐ฐ ๐๐๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ข ๐๐ฆ๐ฑ๐ซ๐ข๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ข๐ฐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
Jesus DID descend to the lower parts of the Earth ๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ฑ๐ฑ๐ข๐ฏ ๐๐๐ถ ๐๐๐ฑ๐๐ซ๐ฐ | ๐๐ซ๐ฑ๐ฆ ๐๐ฏ๐ฌ๐ซ๐ค ๐๐๐ถ ๐๐ก๐ณ๐ข๐ซ๐ฑ๐ฆ๐ฐ๐ช | ๐๐ข๐ฅ๐ฌ๐ณ๐๐ฅ'๐ฐ ๐๐๐ฉ๐ฐ๐ข ๐๐ฆ๐ฑ๐ซ๐ข๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ข๐ฐ
๐1
Transhumanist: >Why I'm Going To Hell According To Pastor Steven Anderson ๐๐ฑ๐ฅ๐ข๐ฌ๐ฆ๐ก | ๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
The Fires of Hell ๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
The Reality of Hell: Soulwinning Motivation โIn flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;โ (2 Thessalonians 1:8-9, KJV) โKnowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also aโฆ
๐1
Reminder that hell is real
๐1
Channel photo updated
People In Hell - Pastor Bruce Mejia | First Works Baptist Church ๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
๐2
~ ๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
๐3
๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐
๐2
What is the worst End Times heresy?
The shares total 140%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
The Resurrection Of The Unsaved ๐ช๐ธ En la segunda muerte, cuando son arrojados al lago de fuego, ยฟquรฉ estรก sucediendo con los incrรฉdulos que, cuando murieron, su alma se fue al infierno, se reencuentran con quรฉ? Su cuerpo. Recuerde, la Biblia dice que todos los que estรกn en las tumbas escucharรกn su voz. Todo el mundo se va a levantar. Quiero decir, hay una resurrecciรณn de los inconversos. Y su nuevo cuerpo, no lo llโฆ
๐4
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @antiannihilationism. 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 โ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it โ t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so โ1,200,000 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.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A pollโs figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
What is the worst End Times heresy?
The shares total 140%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Percentages only โ there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each optionโs share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each optionโs own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 28 November 2025 to 4 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind โ an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results โ and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank โ 441,315 of 1,478,351entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below โ republished posts weigh more than named mentions โ 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 channelโs 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 โ a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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.
Named by 7 registered channels โ 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 โ that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting todayโs namer to yesterdayโs owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
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 โ 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 โ the โNamed by N registered channelsโ figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
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 8 August 2026 โ this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
โ๐ฌ๐๐๐ ๐ฌ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐โ (@antiannihilationism), 160 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/antiannihilationism.
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 ยท 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.