This channel’s posts match, word for word or near enough, posts on 1 other registered channel, found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register. That matching has been checked by hand against the live Telegram pages and found reliable — 0 wrong of 45 pairs re-read.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown. The same hand-check found that reading wrong 18 of 45 times — 60%, no better than a coin flip — because it depends on how deep our own crawl happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Word-for-word matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
3 measurements spanning 7 days, net +6. 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 2,738–2,746 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
13 Aug 2026, 13:16
2,745
+6
7 Aug 2026, 00:41
2,739
no change
7 Aug 2026, 00:32
2,739
first reading
Engagement
17 posts held, back to 3 May 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 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
29.2%
avg views ÷ 2,745 subscribers
Avg views / post
802
1 post measured
Reaction rate
—
this channel exposes no reaction counts
Posts in window
1
of 17 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 25 July 2026
Posts held
17 (3 May 2026 – 25 July 2026)
Views total
802
Reactions total
—
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 16:12 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
1m 11s
Average length
1m 11s
Measured directly from 1 video 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
81 reactions across 12 posts, in 3 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 51.9% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
42
51.9%
🔥
21
25.9%
⚡
18
22.2%
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 17 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 81reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 17 most recent posts we hold, published 3 May 2026 to 25 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.
LIK JAROT MEMBEBER KISAH DIBALIK LAYAR SEMINAR ONLINE, GAGAL MENCARI BEMPER
Akhlak dan Adab Jongkok
Setelah mereka membuat produk, disusunlah skenario menawarkan "produk buatannya" kepada salah satu Ma'had Asatidzah Senior dan menghubungi seorang ustadz kontributor Asy-Syariah agar menjadi pembuka produk mereka dan.... Gagal!!
Demikianlah akhlaq jongkok kepada orang yang lebih tua di dalam dakwah. Tiada kata bermus…
* Apa sikap terhadap berbagai penyimpangan yang selama ini dipermasalahkan para asatidzah?
Selama hal-hal tersebut tidak dijelaskan secara terang, maka wajar apabila sebagian ikhwan masih merasa belum tenang.
Bukan karena ingin mencari-cari kesalahan, tetapi karena persoalan ini menyangkut arah dakwah, manhaj, dan orang-orang yang akan mengambil ilmu.
Apalagi apabila yang lebih sering tampak justru ajakan untuk ti…
CATATAN KRITIS TERHADAP PERYATAAN HARI AHADI
1. Apa yang dimaksud dengan "memuji Rodja"?
Pada poin pertama disebutkan bahwa tidak pernah ada pujian kepada Rodja, bahkan sampai disertai sumpah.
Namun perlu dijelaskan terlebih dahulu, apa definisi "pujian" yang dimaksud?
Apabila seseorang mengatakan bahwa Rodja, RII, dan yang semisalnya masih Ahlus Sunnah, atau memberikan kesan bahwa penyimpangan mereka bukan perk…
DATA PRIMER SEJARAH FITNAH SURURIYAH HALABIYAH RODJAIYAH TURATSIYAH DI INDONESIA
1⃣ Persaksian Ust. Muhammad as-Sewed hafizhahullah.
Tahdzir Asy-Syaikh Rabi' rahimahullah terhadap Al-Sofwa al-Muntada sebagai cangkang fitnah Sururiyah di Indonesia (sebelum lahirnya cangkang baru mereka, Rodja):
» https://t.me/sekelumitsejarah/1964
2⃣ Buku Putih I:
» https://t.me/sekelumitsejarah/1961
3⃣ Buku Putih 2:
» https://t…
[ARCHIVE]
🌵⚔️🌵 MANHAJIYAH: PARODI RODJA & BAHAYA LATEN JARINGANNYA
Jika tak kenal maka tak waspada
💡Bagi anda yang sudah pernah membaca artikel di bawah ini dan menyaksikan bukti-buktinya maka kumpulan link tulisan ini bisa menjadi bahan untuk merefresh ingatan bahaya jaringan Sururiyun Halabiyun masih ada di depan mata.
🔋Bagi anda yang belum pernah membacanya maka semoga arsip data dan bukti yang terhidang akan m…
SAMBIL MENYERANG MINUM AIR
(Hari Ahadi, Antara Dalang Atau Wayang)
Secara kronologis
https://t.me/datadanfakta/1193
1. Hari Ahadi menegaskan fatwanya atas kesamaan akidah Rodja (Halabiyah Sururiyah Turatsiyah) dengan Salafiyun.
https://t.me/BuletinFitnah/1273
2. Umar Jombang mengumumkan melalui statusnya poster seminar online yang masih belum dibuka pendaftarannya pun sudah diminati oleh Ikhwah Singapura
3. Chan…
KALAU ADA ORANG MENGATAKAN BAHWA NANTI ASKARY IKUT DZULQARNAIN, DARIMANA FITNAH SEPERTI INI?!
Tambahan artikel terkait Dzulqarnain:
https://t.me/datadanfakta/346
MUNCULNYA FITNAH-FITNAH SEBAGAI SARINGAN BAGI AHLUSSUNNAH
Segala puji dan syukur kita panjatkan kepada Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala atas penjagaan-Nya kepada salafiyun sehingga tetap di jalan yang lurus dalam bermanhaj sesuai tuntuan Al-Qur'an dan Sunnah.
Dan diantara hikmah di balik adanya fitnah Luqman Ba'abduh, salafiyun benar-benar tersaring di mana-mana:
1. Tersaring dari orang-orang yang cinta kepemimpinan.
2. …
APAKAH CHANNEL “AD-DIR‘U AS-SALAFI” TELAH BERUBAH?
DAN APA SEBAB SIKAP TERBARUNYA TERHADAP MASYAYIKH ADEN?
Sebenarnya sikap terbaru channel Ad-Dir‘u As-Salafi tidak muncul begitu saja, bukan pula karena emosi atau permusuhan terhadap masyayikh Aden, tetapi sikap itu muncul setelah mengikuti perselisihan yang berlangsung dalam waktu lama, setelah mengumpulkan bantahan dari kedua belah pihak dan menelaah apa yang dis…
⚡4🔥2
Showing the 12 most recent of 17 posts we hold for @datadanfakta. 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 — 1,002,448 of 1,480,688entries 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
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
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 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.
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 13 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“🔍DATA & FAKTA” (@datadanfakta), 2,745 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/datadanfakta.
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.
