Channel
@antiskrepa
On this record: Topic · Observations · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cross-platform identity · Referenced elsewhere · Cite this entry
12,487subscribers
-21 since we began measuring on 5 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1002984478326 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @antiskrepa |
| Created | Between 1 August 2025 and 31 October 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 9 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/antiskrepa |
Technology — 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 10 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 76% 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.
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.
13,500 average views per post against 12,487 subscribers — an engagement rate of 107.7%. Across the 23,171 registered channels in the same cohort — 10,000–31,616 subscribers, posting mainly in Russian — the middle half sit between 5.51% and 23.5%, with a median of 11.7%.
| Window | 30 days (13 July 2026 – 12 August 2026) |
|---|---|
| Posts measured | 48 of 48 published in the window (0 exact, 48 rounded by Telegram) |
| Views totalled | 645,650 |
| Mature posts only | 106.4% over 44 posts read at least 24h after publication |
| Subscribers | 12,487 measured 12 August 2026 |
| Cohort | b10000:rus · 23,171 channels · p10 2.54% · p25 5.51% · p50 11.7% · p75 23.5% · p90 42.3% |
| Position in cohort | 99.353th percentile · 9.2× the cohort median |
| Uncertainty | ±0.232% of the figure, from Telegram’s rounding |
| Post language | Russian · 100.0%of the window’s posts |
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal.A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 12 August 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 20:18 | 12,487 | -3 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 19:04 | 12,490 | -3 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 19:18 | 12,493 | -8 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 21:55 | 12,501 | +1 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 23:15 | 12,500 | +1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 23:07 | 12,499 | -3 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 20:56 | 12,502 | -6 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 02:33 | 12,508 | no change |
| 5 Aug 2026, 22:18 | 12,508 | first reading |
48 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 15 pagesof Telegram’s 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) ÷ 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 12 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 48 (31 July 2026 – 12 August 2026) |
| Views total | 645,650 |
| Reactions total | 6,988 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Aug 2026, 12:24 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.
5,172 reactions across 37 posts, in 22 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 51.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 💯 | 2,675 | 51.7% | |
| 👍 | 720 | 13.9% | |
| 😁 | 385 | 7.44% | |
| 🤯 | 366 | 7.08% | |
| ❤ | 318 | 6.15% | |
| 🤔 | 288 | 5.57% | |
| 👏 | 115 | 2.22% | |
| 🥴 | 78 | 1.51% | |
| 😱 | 55 | 1.06% | |
| 😢 | 46 | 0.889% | |
| 🍌 | 35 | 0.677% | |
| ⚡ | 31 | 0.599% | |
| 🥱 | 27 | 0.522% | |
| 🍾 | 12 | 0.232% | |
| 👌 | 8 | 0.155% | |
| ✍ | 4 | 0.077% | |
| 🏆 | 2 | 0.039% | |
| 😍 | 2 | 0.039% | |
| 🤝 | 2 | 0.039% | |
| 🎉 | 1 | 0.019% | |
| 2 further kinds | 2 | 0.039% |
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 48 of the 48 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 6,988reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 48 most recent posts we hold, published 31 July 2026 to 12 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.
Клининг запросил для себя особые условия налогообложения. Тогда, мол, выйдет из тени. Не выйдет. Потому что нал, которым клининг оперирует, продается. С двузначной в процентах выгодой. Даже если с клининга вообще не брать налогов, он все равно будет подворовывать. Дальше можно рубить правду-матку, что льготные условия потребуют и другие сферы, что до сих пор неясно, что такое «клининг» для целей налогообложения, …
👍8💯7
ЦБ считает, что теперь мы инвестируем в недвижимость, фондовые инструменты и… нал. Про бедственное положение девелоперов, связанное с отсутствием спроса, говорено-переговорено. Про обесценивающийся нал - тоже. А вот про таинственные фондовые (финансовые?) инструменты - не очень. Известно, что с начала года домохозяйства вывели из фондов облигаций почти 100 млрд рублей, а внесли 700 миллионов, меньше процента. Сего…
💯48👏9👍1😁1
Скажу откровенно: мне непонятны пляски с бубнами вокруг экстремально низких запасов газа в Европе накануне осени и зимы. Какое нам до этого дело, если Европа сама отказалась от российского газа? Что наши пропагандисты хотят этим сказать? Злорадствуют? Констатируют европейскую тупость? Призывают Европу возобновить закупки у «Газпрома»? Что? Сейчас доля российского газа в Европе составляет 12%, хотя до СВО доходила …
💯152👍78❤5🍌4👏3😢2🤯1
Самыми высокооплачиваемыми сферами в России в январе - мае 2026 г. стали: 📍морское пастбищное рыбоводство (средняя начисленная зарплата 971,4 тыс руб. в месяц), 📍управление пенсионными резервами НПФ (827,1 тыс руб.). В прошлом году разводчики пенсионеров и вовсе были первыми, 📍деятельность по управлению ценными бумагами (737,5 тыс руб.). Нефтегаз со «смешными» 430 тыс руб. остался далеко позади. Впрочем, Росстат…
💯95🤯40❤36😱7👍6🍌1😁1
Минпросвещения ну, очень нравится рекордный прирост желающих получить среднее профобразование. Там констатируют, что на сегодняшний день в колледжи подано на 18% больше заявлений, чем за тот же период 2025 года, и что конкурс на бюджет составляет два человека на место (по отдельным специальностям до 15 человека на место). В то же время Минпрос отлично понимает, что дети идут в колледжи потому, что пройти в 10 клас…
💯124👍12❤7🤔7😱4🍌3⚡2😍1
Помните такую Юлию Цепляеву из Сбера, когда-то сказавшую, что ей жалко людей, купивших доллары по 35? Похоже, у Цепляевой случилась реинкарнация в лице «финансиста» Фруминой из «Плешки», 3 июля этого года заявившей, что покупка долларов целесообразна лишь для краткосрочных целей. Дескать, в долгую, как средство сбережений, не прокатит. Это я к тому, что за несколько дней до «плешкиного откровения» приобрел немного…
💯67😁26👏10❤3🥰1
Россия, как известно, Федерация, малое в целом. Продолжение русской Соборности. Вот и Путин вчера в Бурятии это отметил: И национальное, местное, самобытное важно, и общероссийское важно, важно не просто давать одно и другое, а увязывать это так, чтобы те, кто живут в этих пространствах, пользуются чем-то, чтобы сами приходили к мысли о том, что одно без другого невозможно. Собственно, Путин сказал об этом на встре…
🥴42👍27😁10❤8🤔7👏3
ФТС сообщает, что наша внешняя торговля в I полугодии по экспорту выросла на 12%, а по импорту - на 11%. На чем тогда основаны утверждения «экспертов» о повышенном спросе на валюту? И сколько еще у ЦБ «зайцев в рукаве», чтобы отрицать рукотворный характер девальвации? Заврались в конец😂 Никита Кричевский в Мах
💯77🤔10😁7
Заметил кое-что интересное. Как только стало известно, что государство собирается отделять действительно российские ИИ-модели от решений, собранных на иностранном open-source, в медиаполе началось любопытное движение. Сначала выходит материал о том, что Сбер якобы в четыре раза увеличил расходы на продвижение GigaChat. Следом — волна публикаций о его отставании от «Алисы AI»: пользователи якобы уходят, конкурент без…
💯60🤔21😁12❤10🍌3🎉1
#нампишут про этот пост. А кто-то в мире вообще отчитался о прибыли в ИИ-гонке и раздувании пузыря ИИ? Благодаря которому (пузырю) под бонды и акции печатаются деньги? Прямо осязаемые прибыли есть? Чего-то не видно, а модели надо выпускать все новее и новее. Для их обучения надо все больше данных и, соответсвенно, больше процесоров и больше памяти (которой и так нет), а значит гонка будет продолжаться. Вопросы, н…
👍46👌2💯1
Г-н Тремасов из дутого канала MMI транслирует линию ЦБ, полагая, что ставка 14% - излишне мягка. И что если бы ДКП была жестче, никакого бегства в нал не было. Другими словами, главная причина массового ухода в нал - не высокие налоги, не падающий спрос, не отложенные крупные покупки, а «низкая» ставка ЦБ. Спорить с упоротыми нельзя ни в коем случае - задавят демагогией. К тому же, истинная причина подобных бредне…
💯75🤯13❤6👍4
При идентификации экономического кризиса ваш профессор настоятельно рекомендует пользоваться «утиным тестом»: если нечто крякает, плавает и ходит как утка, то, вероятно, это утка и есть. Ну, а то, что официальной рецессии пока удается избежать, то погрешности утиного оперения. Вот, скажем, доля офисов, готовых для покупки, за год выросла с 8 до 28% от вновь построенного, это не что иное, как показатель отсутствия с…
💯79👍12❤7😁5
Showing the 12 most recent of 48 posts we hold for @antiskrepa. 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 — 84,857 of 1,151,006entries 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.
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 44 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.
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.
A Wikidata item names this Telegram handle as belonging to the entity it describes. This is Wikidata’s claim, not a verification made by this register — nobody here confirmed that the account is genuinely operated by the entity named. Wikidata content is CC0; every fact below is dated to when it was read from Wikidata, not to when the association was first made there.
| Label | Nikita Krichevsky |
|---|---|
| Description | Russian economist |
| Official site | http://www.krichevsky.ru |
This handle named by sources this register does not control and did not measure — each shown exactly as found, attributed by name, dated to when it was read.
Wikipedia
One Wikipedia article names this handle in its article text, found by searching for a t.me link inside the article source. A citation is a notability signal, not a verification: nobody here confirmed the cited post is genuine or still says what the article quotes. Article text is CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikipedia contributors; snippets below are short excerpts.
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.
“Никита Кричевский” (@antiskrepa), 12,487 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/antiskrepa.
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.