Posted without readable text
👍9❤1

Channel
@cikbelarus
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cross-platform identity · Referenced elsewhere · Cite this entry
6,134subscribers
-111 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001546668870 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @cikbelarus |
| Created | 21 January 2022 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 10 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 28 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 10 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/cikbelarus |
Politics & activism — 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 72% 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.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Nov 2026, 22:11 | 6,134 | +1 |
| 7 Nov 2026, 10:15 | 6,133 | -2 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 03:29 | 6,135 | +1 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 23:14 | 6,134 | -10 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 22:08 | 6,144 | -2 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 03:37 | 6,146 | -5 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 22:49 | 6,151 | -2 |
| 20 Oct 2026, 03:47 | 6,153 | -1 |
| 17 Oct 2026, 11:06 | 6,154 | -1 |
| 14 Oct 2026, 12:48 | 6,155 | -7 |
| 11 Oct 2026, 03:20 | 6,162 | -2 |
| 5 Oct 2026, 00:42 | 6,164 | -6 |
| 25 Sept 2026, 20:17 | 6,170 | -5 |
| 17 Sept 2026, 12:18 | 6,175 | -6 |
| 13 Sept 2026, 12:55 | 6,181 | -2 |
| 9 Sept 2026, 19:36 | 6,183 | -9 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 06:56 | 6,192 | -8 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 06:18 | 6,200 | -5 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 19:42 | 6,205 | -4 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 09:12 | 6,209 | first reading |
36 posts held, back to 4 August 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 13 pages of 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 5 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 36 (4 August 2026 – 5 November 2026) |
| Views total | 22,288 |
| Reactions total | 210 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 5 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.
380 reactions across 35 posts, in 14 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 66.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 254 | 66.8% | |
| ❤ | 77 | 20.3% | |
| 💯 | 18 | 4.74% | |
| 🔥 | 10 | 2.63% | |
| 🏆 | 8 | 2.11% | |
| ❤🔥 | 4 | 1.05% | |
| 😍 | 2 | 0.526% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 0.263% | |
| 😴 | 1 | 0.263% | |
| 🤓 | 1 | 0.263% | |
| 🤔 | 1 | 0.263% | |
| 🤝 | 1 | 0.263% | |
| 🤨 | 1 | 0.263% | |
| 🫡 | 1 | 0.263% |
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 36 of the 36 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 380 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 36 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 5 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’s own ‘edited’ marker: 2 of 14 posts held from the last 30 days (14.3%) 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).
Posted without readable text
👍9❤1
⬆️👩💼 Если избиратель заявляет, что допустил ошибку при заполнении бюллетеня, член комиссии выдает ему новый бюллетень и разъясняет, что в случае порчи этого бюллетеня выдача нового (третьего) бюллетеня не допускается. ❗️При этом на испорченном бланке избиратель ставит свою подпись, бюллетень погашается, а в списке избирателей напротив фамилии гражданина делается запись о выдаче нового бюллетеня.
👍14❤1
Posted without readable text
⬆️👩💼 Закон гарантирует тайну волеизъявления гражданина. Нахождение в кабине для голосования двух и более человек одновременно не допускается.
💯8👍3
Posted without readable text
👍9
⬆️👩💼 Согласно Избирательному кодексу, если гражданин внесен в списки избирателей, бюллетень может быть выдан не только по паспорту (идентификационной карте), но и по другим документам, подтверждающим личность, перечень которых утверждается ЦИК (водительское удостоверение, военный билет, пенсионное, служебное удостоверение, билет учащегося).
💯9👍4🔥4❤1
Posted without readable text
❤7🏆7👍3
🗳 Почувствуйте себя членом участковой комиссии! 👥 Проверьте свои знания в нашем квесте! 🧩 Кажется, что на избирательном участке только выдают бюллетени и считают голоса. Но на самом деле за этим стоит масштабная и ответственная работа тысяч организаторов выборов по всей стране 🇧🇾 Кто входит в состав участковой комиссии? 👥 Представителей выдвигают политические партии, общественные объединения, трудовые коллективы …
👍19❤4🤓1🫡1😴1
🤔 В последние десятилетия вопросы возрастного избирательного ценза стали предметом активных дискуссий в мировом экспертном сообществе. Современный тренд на «омоложение» электората заставляет многие государства расширять границы политического участия молодежи. ❔В каких государствах разрешено голосовать на местных выборах с 15–16 лет? ❔ Где этот же возрастной порог действует на общенациональных выборах? ❔ Каковы разл…
👍14🤝1
⏺Председатель ЦИК Беларуси встретился с представителями банков и небанковских финансовых организаций. Главной темой встречи стало обеспечение электорального суверенитета и экономическая безопасность в период проведения ключевых общественно-политических кампаний. Игорь Карпенко подробно рассказал о механизмах защиты избирательной системы от вмешательства, цифровизации избирательного процесса. Особое внимание на вст…
👍13❤3
⏺От олимпиады к экспертной площадке: в Беларуси стартовала "Школа молодого избирателя". Читать подробнее.
👍14❤3❤🔥3
Белорусская форма народовластия. Вспоминаем, как 30 лет назад проходило первое ВНС - читайте здесь👈 #Всебелорусское_народное_собрание🇧🇾
👍12❤3
Showing the 12 most recent of 36 posts we hold for @cikbelarus. 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.
The 6 most recent of 18 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Председатель комиссии просит показать бюллетень для проверки, что знак стоит в одном квадрате. Допустима ли такая проверка?
Shares as published, totalling 101%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Какое действие наблюдателя на участке является нарушением принципа тайны голосования?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Супруги вошли в одну кабину, но каждый заполняет свой бюллетень самостоятельно. Допускается ли это?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Избиратель не может сам заполнить бюллетень. Кого он вправе пригласить для помощи?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Что из перечисленного строго запрещено на участке для обеспечения тайны голосования?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Избиратель случайно поставил в бюллетене знак не в том квадрате. Чтобы сохранить тайну своего выбора, может ли он вынести испорченный бюллетень с участка или порвать его?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none. The public post preview gives each option’s 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 option’s 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 36 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 5 November 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
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 3 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.
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.
This channel appears in 32 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 | Central Election Commission of Belarus |
|---|---|
| Description | government body |
| Official site | http://rec.gov.by |
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 10 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“ЦИК Беларуси” (@cikbelarus), 6,134 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/cikbelarus.
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.