和自私的人谈恋爱,只有在他情绪稳定的时候会爱你记住这句话 😂来自亚太交友文案馆 💸啊岁💸
❤2

Channel
@cpdd0000
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
16,518subscribers
+113 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1002066344441 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @cpdd0000 |
| Created | Between 1 November 2023 and 31 May 2024— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 17 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 23 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 16 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 23 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/cpdd0000 |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 23 Aug 2026, 03:25 | 16,518 | +23 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 14:14 | 16,495 | +7 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 16:58 | 16,488 | +26 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 15:28 | 16,462 | +1 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 11:52 | 16,461 | +13 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 20:58 | 16,448 | no change |
| 17 Aug 2026, 14:24 | 16,448 | -20 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 04:28 | 16,468 | -12 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 15:26 | 16,480 | -3 |
| 13 Aug 2026, 06:17 | 16,483 | +3 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 02:34 | 16,480 | +55 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 02:25 | 16,425 | +7 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 01:42 | 16,418 | +14 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 23:02 | 16,404 | -3 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 20:45 | 16,407 | +2 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 11:52 | 16,405 | first reading |
207 posts held, back to 17 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 11 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. It is computed over the 75 of 207 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 22 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 207 (17 August 2026 – 22 August 2026) |
| Views total | 69,534 |
| Reactions total | 196 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 22 Aug 2026, 23:14 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.
Measured directly from 69 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.
196 reactions across 66 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 52.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🤣 | 102 | 52.0% | |
| ❤ | 34 | 17.3% | |
| 🤡 | 14 | 7.14% | |
| 😁 | 13 | 6.63% | |
| 👍 | 12 | 6.12% | |
| 🌚 | 3 | 1.53% | |
| 🥰 | 3 | 1.53% | |
| 🍌 | 2 | 1.02% | |
| 👎 | 2 | 1.02% | |
| 🔥 | 2 | 1.02% | |
| 😱 | 2 | 1.02% | |
| 🥴 | 2 | 1.02% | |
| ❤🔥 | 1 | 0.51% | |
| 👌 | 1 | 0.51% | |
| 🖕 | 1 | 0.51% | |
| 🙈 | 1 | 0.51% | |
| 🤬 | 1 | 0.51% |
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 75 of the 207 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 196reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 207 most recent posts we hold, published 17 August 2026 to 22 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.
和自私的人谈恋爱,只有在他情绪稳定的时候会爱你记住这句话 😂来自亚太交友文案馆 💸啊岁💸
❤2
👤 昵称:琛 🚺 男|29岁 📍 亚太 📏 175cm 💰 保密(绝对够用) 💼 管理 ✨ 关于我 冷酷,强势、自信、冷傲,兼具极强的控制欲与专属的深情 ❤️ 希望你 19-24岁,身高尽量不要比我高,体重140斤以下,皮肤白 ,不抽烟,有责任心。圈子不乱, 夜班优先考虑 TG:@BOSS996633 ⚠️温馨提示 请勿涉及金钱交易。
帮忙投稿一下 有没有老街小姐姐聊聊天交个朋友 年龄不限. @VIP88888001
👤 昵称:张樾 🚺 男|29 📍 771 📏 175 ✨ 关于我 性格温和,喜欢旅行,希望遇到一个真诚的人,一起经营未来。 ❤️ 烂赌鬼不要来,真诚一点, TG:@wangzha0317 ⚠️温馨提示 请勿涉及金钱交易。
有没有玩包厢的 女孩子联系@pao1234512345
手心向上 尊严向下 我这样要强的人苦就苦吧,起码对人生的掌控感是任何人都给不了我的 😂来自亚太交友文案馆 💸小叶💸
有情有义的人变得开口闭口只剩下钱 然后他们还会说你就知道钱 多可笑 😂来自亚太交友文案馆 💸楼大💸
真正的爱不是无条件满足,而是你的想法有人认真倾听,你的期待有人愿意一起衡量,你想象的未来里,始终有人愿意和你商量。 😂来自亚太交友文案馆 💸野猫💸
那句我会回来的除了灰太狼好像谁也没做到过 😂来自亚太交友文案馆 💸妹妹💸
树上的桔子和地上的叶,都有他自己的路要走。 😂来自亚太交友文案馆 💸花茶💸
🤡1
我和他认识了以后聊了十几天吧,就默认在一起了,在一起他不主动公开,也不主动给我亲密的备注,一聊起这个话题他就扯开话题或者不回复,问他为什么不公开,他说公开干嘛,不公开又咋了,他是不是不喜欢我,只是在这个空窗期遇到了我,正好我主动,好迷茫 😂来自亚太交友文案馆 💸陌陌💸
3️⃣⚡️😎0️⃣🌟0️⃣😀😀😀😀😀😀 😀 【场馆我们选,责任我们扛|这才是U8的底气】 😀 近日某场馆“漏洞事件”闹得沸沸扬扬。 😀 有些平台平时欢迎会员来玩,一到会员赢大了,就开始搬出“套利”“内部勾结”“场馆漏洞”等理由,拖审核、卡出款、把责任全甩给玩家。 😀 会员赢几百万就开始找借口,问题真在场馆吗?说到底,不是场馆有漏洞,是平台实力有漏洞! 😀 U8的态度只有一句:敢让会员玩,就要敢给会员出。场馆是U8精选的,责任就由U8承担。只要会员正常投注、凭本事赢,该出的,一分不少! 😀 牛逼不是吹的,实力也不是喊的。平台敢收,更要敢付;会员赢了以后痛快兑现,才是真正的行业底气! 😀 U8 全线场馆同步开启。😀😀、😀😀、😀😀、😀😀、💰💰等多种玩法,陪你度过每一个瞬间。 😀 来U8,你尽管赢,出款交给我们! 😀 官方信息入口: 😀😀😀😀😀: U8ZCM.COM 😀😀😀😀😀: @U8BYDCOM 😀U8官方客服: @…
Showing the 12 most recent of 207 posts we hold for @cpdd0000. 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 — 1,126,362 of 1,584,420entries 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.
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 1 registered channel — 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.
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.
@cpdd0000 named 2 handles that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all.A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
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 5 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 23 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“亚太( 东南亚 )交友频道 文案馆” (@cpdd0000), 16,518 subscribers as measured 23 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/cpdd0000.
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.