Channel
@fawn_arts
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
737subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001633628339 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @fawn_arts |
| Created | 21 March 2022 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 8 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 8 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/fawn_arts |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Aug 2026, 01:26 | 737 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 03:18 | 737 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 13 April 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 1 pageof 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 30 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 20 (13 April 2026 – 30 July 2026) |
| Views total | 113 |
| Reactions total | 21 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 03:18 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.
755 reactions across 20 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 44.6% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| custom 5918226133706346502 | 337 | 44.6% | |
| custom 5902113331967169801 | 203 | 26.9% | |
| custom 5465514676374746733 | 125 | 16.6% | |
| custom 5197441479391324440 | 53 | 7.02% | |
| custom 5217980309353539680 | 28 | 3.71% | |
| custom 5969761051154059964 | 9 | 1.19% |
Custom emoji. Every 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 counts beside them areTelegram’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 20 of the 20 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 755reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 13 April 2026 to 30 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.
Вас приветствует Fawn. Одна из организаторов этого зина и просто участница.🔥 ──────── • ✤ • ──────── ТГ: Fawn ВК: F A W N | коммишки, мерч ТТ: Fawn #zukozine #zukozine_info
custom 591822613370634650211custom 59021133319671698016custom 54655146763747467334
Прикольную штуку выкатил тг! У меня конечно постов пока нема. Что не так ново для меня и вас (господи правда простите извините) очередное «ну знаете работа, зин, поиграть еще хочется в ендфилд, завоооооды там» Ыххыхвхв
custom 591822613370634650216
Posted without readable text
custom 59021133319671698016
Иногда вот как захочется в традишку, как вот прям МММММ Захнюхнуть этих спиртовых маркеров. Эту пыль от карандаша 🕺
custom 591822613370634650236custom 546551467637474673324custom 51974414793913244408
🤣🤣🤣🤣
custom 519744147939132444016
ВНИМАНИЕ ВСЕМ! Я СХВАТИЛА ЕГО, СРОЧНО ВСЕМ ЦЕЛОВАТЬ!!! 🤨😥 〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️ #hsr_fawn #blade #hsr
custom 591822613370634650246custom 590211333196716980124custom 519744147939132444014custom 54655146763747467334
Блин рендерю Блейдика И ОН ТАКОЙ ХОРОШИЙ ПОЛУЧАЕТСЯ Я НЕ МОГУ
custom 591822613370634650239custom 546551467637474673315custom 52179803093535396807custom 59697610511540599641
Я человек непостоянный. Короче скетч принесла Блейдика. Разумеется я до ума его доведу❤️ Это так, процессики
custom 591822613370634650240custom 54655146763747467339custom 52179803093535396805
Все кто еще жив! Мы открыли набор в Зуко- зин! ПОДАВАЙТЕ ЗАЯВКИ ЁКЕЛЕМЕНЕ! Там еще подгон в виде стикеров с Зуко. И со временем их будет всё больше и больше!!!
custom 591822613370634650215
Ребят щас походу буду думать про создание зина Зуко…. Потому что есть желающие мне помочь с орг моментами 🤪
custom 590211333196716980122
Отмена кипиша. Я ушла из зина по мидэю. Я лучше вам как нибудь просто так его порисую. Организация оставляет желать лучшего. Я не готова рисковать.
custom 591822613370634650223custom 521798030935353968012custom 54655146763747467333
Чтож Прошла в Зин по сексуальному мужчине, полуголому символу овуляции. Мидэю. Надеюсь все пройдет хорошо. Зин успешно выйдет. Постараюсь нарисовать туда такой арт, который растворит ваши трусы.
custom 590211333196716980120custom 59182261337063465025custom 54655146763747467333
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @fawn_arts. 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 — 348,158 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.
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 5 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.
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.
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 8 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“F A W N |фанарт, коммишки 18+” (@fawn_arts), 737 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/fawn_arts.
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.