2 measurements taken within a single day. 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 425–427 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
7 Aug 2026, 15:06
426
no change
7 Aug 2026, 03:15
426
first reading
Engagement
15 posts held, back to 22 December 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 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
31.2%
avg views ÷ 426 subscribers
Avg views / post
133
1 post measured
Reaction rate
10.5%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
1
of 15 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 22 July 2026
Posts held
15 (22 December 2025 – 22 July 2026)
Views total
133
Reactions total
14
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 03:15 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.
Reaction mix
188 reactions across 12 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 46.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
87
46.3%
🔥
57
30.3%
🤣
9
4.79%
❤🔥
8
4.26%
custom 5425069390255117410
6
3.19%
👏
6
3.19%
👍
4
2.13%
🏆
3
1.60%
🙏
3
1.60%
🕊
2
1.06%
😱
2
1.06%
🤔
1
0.532%
Custom emoji. One row above is a 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 count beside it isTelegram’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 12 of the 15 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 188reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 15 most recent posts we hold, published 22 December 2025 to 22 July 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
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 12 we hold a reading for · 8%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @comms_cave. 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 15 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 22 December 2025 to 22 July 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.
🎵 Подкаст про личный бренд: 3 эксперта, 12 вопросов и ответов
В очередной раз убедилась, что самые классные штуки рождаются в коллаборациях, потому что:
✨ вы ускоряете продакшн своих идей (у нас сегодня от конца записи до публикации — буквально час)
✨ увеличиваете аудиторию и объем потенциальных связей
✨ у вас есть совместные коммиты и дедлайны, за которые отвечает не только ваша совесть (а она не бесконечна)
✨ прин…
🪬 Наружка про нас с вами
Я люблю изучать наружную рекламу, и сегодня с нами фоточка из Владикавказа. Я провела там неделю в июне, и обратила внимание, как много обычных горожан в наружной рекламе.
Вот доктор-педиатр рассказывает о своей практике и приглашает в клинику. Вот выпускница с результатом ЕГЭ по химии и рекламой образовательного центра.
Сильная штука и очень настоящая. В Москве эту роскошь себе позволить …
🔉 Подкаст с психологом про отношения с собой (и приглашение поболтать про подкасты)
Продолжаю открывать для себя подкасты. Этот (ссылки ниже) довольно долго лежал отснятым на полке, но потом оказалось, что я всё-таки умею сводить звук и видео сама, а ещё монтировать смешные анонсы :)
В целом этот канал довольно долго был про техническую редактуру, и только в последнее время начинает расширяться в сторону коммуникац…
🔉 Внезапный подкаст про практику работы с ИИ
У меня давно бродили мысли поболтать о чём-то вслух для этого канала, и вот ура, это случилось. Записали подкаст вместе с Яной Рогозиной — получился диалог двух практиков, которые каждый день работают руками, мозгами и текстами. Его можно послушать в сообщении выше или по ссылке на mave (ИИ, кстати, подсказал, что это удобная платформа и вуаля).
Про что говорили:
🌟Где пр…
🐟 Адаптируемся к тг-кризису: стрим для деврелов и не только
Продолжаю размышлять про коммуникации в 2026+, и хочу вас позвать на стрим для деврелов (и не только!). Завтра вечером в 18:00 по мск крутые ребята с рынка — представители ИТ-компаний, агентств и конференций соберутся, чтобы поговорить:
🌟Как адаптировались к замедлениям, запретам рекламы и уходам сервисов в 2022-2025 и какие уроки из этого могут пригодитьс…
😋Человеку нужен человек
Миленькая история без морали тут случилась.
Звонок по телефону:
— Алло, Тонь, привет! Мы тут макеты сдаем в печать, а как пишется выражение...?
*Диктую по буквам, поясняю, что знаки препинания не нужны.
— Спасибо! Твой ответ совпал с тем, что говорит нейросеть!
— Очень почётно конечно, спасибо ☺️
— Ты не поняла, это я тобой её проверяю!
Хихикаю над приметами нашего времени и желаю всем о…
👁 Что нас ждёт при работе в коммуникациях в 2026+
Я недавно стартанула свою практику с консультациями про личные бренды и бренды команд. Хочу поделиться с вами первыми заметками на полях. Сначала думала, что буду говорить про важность работы с целевыми аудиториями и рисовать смешные комиксы про это, но, пожалуй, пусть они чуть-чуть подождут. Мы с ними обязательно встретимся.
Буквально на каждой первой консультации …
🐟 Открыла практику консультаций про коммуникации
В конце года я рассказывала, что планирую уйти из Позитива, и сейчас поделюсь, чем это всё закончилось продолжается. Я открыла свою практику в области коммуникаций — whatagreatfish.pro. И зову на консультации! Условия и запись в конце поста.
Вот на чем я сейчас фокусируюсь:
6️⃣ Консультации по личному бренду. Здесь довольно широко: от выбора площадки и разговоров пр…
😶🌫️ Маленькое упражнение чтобы «расписаться»
Иногда начать писать про то, что хочется, совсем страшно. Тогда я предлагаю авторам разминку, которая почти гарантированно поднимает настроение. Особенно если поработать над этим в группе :)
Берём наборы рандомных эмодзи и пишем по ним историю на пять предложений. Здесь фишка в том, что нет никакой критики, а есть спонтанность и элемент непредсказуемости. Эмодзи задают …
🦆 Смелость маленькой уточки
Сегодня расскажу, как вышло, что у меня появился талисман — маленькая резиновая уточка.
Много лет назад я прочла анекдот, который насмешил меня до слёз — это была осенняя драма про (не)перелётных птиц. Вот он (18+):
Озеро. Лебеди разминают крылья.
Красавец-лебедь картинно становится в позы культуриста, растягивая каждое сухожилие, поигрывая мускулами.
Подходит маленькая серая уточка, мне…
Showing the 12 most recent of 15 posts we hold for @comms_cave. 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.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 228,721 of 1,189,255entries 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
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.
Mentions
Named by 2 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.
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 7 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Логово коммуникатора | Антонина Татчук” (@comms_cave), 426 subscribers as measured 7 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/comms_cave.
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.