Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Bad Zu

@bad_zu

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

1,917subscribers

+7 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001488955757
TypeChannel
Username@bad_zu
Created5 April 2020measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held4
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/bad_zu

Growth

1,9101,9171,913.56 August 2026 — 1,910 subscribers6 August 2026 — 1,910 subscribers10 August 2026 — 1,911 subscribers12 August 2026 — 1,917 subscribers6 August 202612 August 2026
4 measurements spanning 7 days, net +7. 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 1,909–1,918 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 20:181,917+6
10 Aug 2026, 00:411,911+1
6 Aug 2026, 06:351,910no change
6 Aug 2026, 02:231,910first reading

Engagement

23 posts held, back to 18 June 2026the 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
33.2%
avg views ÷ 1,917 subscribers
Avg views / post
637
9 posts measured
Reaction rate
4.19%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
9
of 23 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
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026
Posts held23 (18 June 20267 August 2026)
Views total5,729
Reactions total240
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken7 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 “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
17m 28s
Average length
3m 30s

Measured directly from 5 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

582 reactions across 19 posts, in 24 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 21.3% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
🔥12421.3%
12321.1%
🤣9215.8%
❤‍🔥9015.5%
🤯366.19%
😁325.50%
🏆122.06%
😍101.72%
💊81.37%
😱81.37%
👌71.20%
😭71.20%
🤪61.03%
👍50.859%
👏40.687%
🫡40.687%
🍓30.515%
💯30.515%
👾20.344%
🙏20.344%
4 further kinds40.687%

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 23 of the 23 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 768reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 23 most recent posts we hold, published 18 June 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.

Recent posts

7 Aug 2026, 10:05 UTC209 views11 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

БОЛЬШЕ ТРЕХ МЕСЯЦЕВ РАБОТЫ С ЭКСПЕРИМЕНТАЛЬНОЙ ЭЛЕКТРОНИКОЙ УБИВАЮТ ПСИХИКУ))) Именно по этой причине автора первого графического редактора звука Дафну Орам уволили из собственной студии. И если тебе казалось, что жизнь полна говна и несправедливости - вот краткая история этой великой женщины. В 1942-м, в семнадцать, Орам отказалась от места в Королевском колледже музыки и пошла младшим звукачом на радио BBC. Рабо

❤‍🔥81🔥1😭1

7 Aug 2026, 08:10 UTC269 views19 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

ЗАВТРА с 21 00 отжарю вас на Круто) Это один из моих самых любимых фестов - так что ждите полный разьеб)

🔥87😍4

6 Aug 2026, 09:31 UTC411 views4 reactionsread 7 August 2026

ПАЦАНЫ ВОПРОС - а вы видели когда-нибудь крутые (любые) сэмплеры или базы со славянскими голосами, хорами и т д. Мне тут для сериала нужна такая штука, а записывать хор бабушек бабок наверняка нет( Расцелую за любую инфу

4

5 Aug 2026, 07:13 UTC509 views40 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Когда упал в садике, и теперь раз в десять минут надо искать зеркало, чтобы ПОСМОТРЕТЬ НА ТИГРОВ НА ПЛАСТЫРЕ

🤣23❤‍🔥8😍63

4 Aug 2026, 09:05 UTC572 views29 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Случайность, которая определила звучание музыки на десятки лет вперед Сегодня поговорим про еще один случай, который изменил музон) 1967 год, Стэнфорд. Джон Чаунинг, композитор-перкуссионист, ночами он возится с простой (простой сегодня с крутыми компами)))) задачей: гоняет два простых синусоидальных осциллятора, где один слегка качает высоту другого. Обычное вибрато, ничего особенного. Насколько я понимаю - пример

24🔥3❤‍🔥2

3 Aug 2026, 09:03 UTC694 views33 reactionsread 7 August 2026

А вы замечали, что если зациклить любой звук, через какое-то время он становится музыкальнее? Не просто привычнее именно музыкальнее, будто проступает мотив и ритм даже если изначально это просто пиздеж или скрежет. Так вот - это не потому что вы пересидели за абликом. Это сбой восприятия, и корни этого явления в том, как устроен наш слух. В 1995-м психоакустик Диана Дойч сводила свой диск. Вычищая запись собстве

18🔥9❤‍🔥4🫡2

20 Jul 2026, 10:02 UTC983 views36 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

⚡️Илья Мэддисон и Glukoza озвучат новое бесплатное DLC для «Альтушки для скуфа» Легенда рутуба озвучит внутренний голос скуфа, а Глюкоза — роковую альтушку Релиз — 30 июля

17🤣11🔥8

20 Jul 2026, 10:02 UTC892 views3 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Вы знаете, кто это замутил)

😁3

16 Jul 2026, 13:16 UTC≈1,190 views65 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Что-то на зверином 🥶

❤‍🔥36🔥18💊82🤩1

10 Jul 2026, 16:12 UTC≈1,150 views29 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Барабаны записаны) Новый BAD ZU злее, чем когда-либо

🔥19❤‍🔥5🏆3🙏2

9 Jul 2026, 13:01 UTC≈1,060 views34 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Хорошие новости - сейчас редкость, но это одна из них. После мучительных переговоров мы заключили контракт с агентством талантов NEU. Это вот такие люди, которые связывают спецов и клиентов. И я честно говоря, уже не жалею об этом решении)) Спасибо этим чудесным девушкам за их настойчивость (я по-началу не понимал, зачем оно надо)!!! Надеюсь, мы вас не разочаровываем)

20🏆9👏4🔥1

8 Jul 2026, 08:59 UTC891 views40 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Ну что, чуваки - пришло время охуительных историй. И отдельно мне приятно, что тему подкинул один из вас! Настало время обсудить пердеж сельди! В 80-х шведский флот годами ловил в воде некий «типичный звук» и был уверен: это русские подлодки. Сигнал исправно попадал в ежегодные военные отчёты и дошло до того, что в 1994-м премьер Швеции написал письмо Ельцину с вопросом, что вообще происходит. Ельцин ответил, что э

😁21🔥115🤣2🥰1

Showing the 12 most recent of 23 posts we hold for @bad_zu. 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 — 219,018 of 1,176,251entries 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

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 5 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.

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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Bad Zu” (@bad_zu), 1,917 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/bad_zu.

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.