13 measurements spanning 5 days, net -2,739. 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 71,721–75,282 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
13 Aug 2026, 03:26
72,132
-29
13 Aug 2026, 00:38
72,161
-318
12 Aug 2026, 04:54
72,479
-43
12 Aug 2026, 02:08
72,522
-655
11 Aug 2026, 07:15
73,177
-169
11 Aug 2026, 03:37
73,346
-585
10 Aug 2026, 06:46
73,931
-1
10 Aug 2026, 05:13
73,932
-220
9 Aug 2026, 10:07
74,152
-45
9 Aug 2026, 04:12
74,197
-197
8 Aug 2026, 09:39
74,394
-191
8 Aug 2026, 04:57
74,585
-286
7 Aug 2026, 19:16
74,871
first reading
Engagement
138 posts held, back to 7 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 16 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
3.20%
avg views ÷ 72,132 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,310
138 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.55%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
138
of 138 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. It is computed over the 133 of 138 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 12 August 2026
Posts held
138 (7 August 2026 – 12 August 2026)
Views total
318,254
Reactions total
10,961
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Aug 2026, 19:02 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
34m 48s
Average length
55s
Measured directly from 38 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
10,961 reactions across 133 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 20.6% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🎉
2,258
20.6%
😁
2,206
20.1%
👍
2,188
20.0%
🔥
2,159
19.7%
❤
2,150
19.6%
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 133 of the 138 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 10,961reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 138 most recent posts we hold, published 7 August 2026 to 12 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.
Showing the 12 most recent of 138 posts we hold for @dcccc888. 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 — 103,861 of 1,151,006entries 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 18 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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
7
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
7
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
0
vacant every time we have ever looked
@dcccc888 named 7 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.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
@huarendashijiandc named in 8 posts, 8 August 2026 – 11 August 2026 · confirmed gone 11 August 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@topnewsdc named in 8 posts, 8 August 2026 – 11 August 2026 · confirmed gone 11 August 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@videodc named in 5 posts, 8 August 2026 – 11 August 2026 · confirmed gone 11 August 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@picturedc named in 5 posts, 8 August 2026 – 11 August 2026 · confirmed gone 11 August 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@djmusicdc named in 5 posts, 8 August 2026 – 11 August 2026 · confirmed gone 11 August 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@ribaonews named in 3 posts, 8 August 2026 – 11 August 2026 · confirmed gone 10 August 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
@wuxiaoshinews named in 3 posts, 8 August 2026 – 11 August 2026 · confirmed gone 10 August 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
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.
“柬埔寨安危事件🐲” (@dcccc888), 72,132 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/dcccc888.
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.
