Channel
@fisheye_pm
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
50subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 8 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002765826214 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @fisheye_pm |
| Created | Between 1 June 2025 and 30 September 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 10 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 10 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| On Telegram | t.me/fisheye_pm |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Aug 2026, 11:30 | 50 | no change |
| 8 Aug 2026, 19:30 | 50 | first reading |
18 posts held, back to 20 November 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 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 29 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 18 (20 November 2025 – 29 July 2026) |
| Views total | 36 |
| Reactions total | 3 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 10 Aug 2026, 11:30 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 10 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
80 reactions across 17 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 42.5% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 34 | 42.5% | |
| 👍 | 18 | 22.5% | |
| ❤ | 13 | 16.3% | |
| 👏 | 5 | 6.25% | |
| 😁 | 4 | 5.00% | |
| 😱 | 2 | 2.50% | |
| ✍ | 1 | 1.25% | |
| 💯 | 1 | 1.25% | |
| 🤔 | 1 | 1.25% | |
| 🤯 | 1 | 1.25% |
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 17 of the 18 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 80reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 18 most recent posts we hold, published 20 November 2025 to 29 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.
Будем как Стратоплан Стратоплан -- это школа менеджмента, очень крутая. Как я с ними познакомилась и чему у них научилась -- в другой раз, а сегодня поделюсь фактом, который я рассказываю каждому, с кем о Стратоплане говорю: У Стратоплана все созвоны начинаются ровно вовремя. Но это умеют многие. А еще у них все созвоны заканчиваются ровно вовремя -- и такое не умеет практически никто. "Будем как Стратоплан" -- г…
👍3
Особенности оффлайна На конференции собирают мнения участников: в чем ты лучше чем ИИ? Сбор клёвый, без QR-кодов, ботов и регистраций: отрывай стикер, пиши маркером, клей на стенд. Все ответы классные, но особенно меня улыбнул "Могу научить правильно отрывать стикеры!" (Между прочим, я тоже могу 📝) А правильное и неправильное отрывание стикеров демонстрирует прямо этот стенд: где стикер лежит гладко -- правильно …
🔥4
Конференция SaintTeamLead идет сейчас в СПб
🔥7
Одна важная мысль для руководителя: Опираться можно только на то, что сопротивляется. Прочитайте ещё раз. А теперь честно ответьте себе: Ваши подчиненные вам сопротивляются?
👍2🤔1😱1
👇 хорошо Лёша сформулировал
Предвзятый выбор: мнение лектора Про задачу с предвзятым выбором у меня несколько мыслей, которые я бы организовала вот так: 1️⃣ Что за катастрофа? "Неправильный выбор — катастрофа через несколько лет" конечно выглядит как заблуждение, ложь или манипуляция. Один-единственный выбор никогда не формирует большое будущее сам по себе. Если выбор хороший, он еще должен быть поддержан последующими систематическими усил…
🔥3
#задача: "Предвзятый выбор" Вот здесь Лёша описывает случай с конференции: клик. Мне кажется, прям распространенный сценарий. Что там на конференции было: участники приносят ситуации сложного выбора, эксперты обсуждают доводы за разные решения. В одном случае владелец кейса не хотел "лучшего" выбора, а под видом сравнения продавливал вариант, который лично ему нравился. Знакомо? "Давайте обсудим, надо ли делать ре…
😱1
Схема для совещания: мнение лектора Я конечно считаю, что главное свойство схемы, которую мы хотим использовать, чтобы договариваться со смежниками -- это редактируемость. Точнее: совместная интерактивная редактируемость. Возможность на встрече со смежниками вместе уточнить схему, изобразить корнер-кейсы, добавить подробностей или наоборот убрать их -- вот что важно. Если это есть, остальное докрутите (вместе со св…
❤4🔥3👏2
Дополнительный вопрос ко вчерашней задаче! Злободневная часть, которая вчера осталась подразумеваемой: Как использовать ИИ при подготовке схем-диаграмм в описанной ситуации? Как "правильно", и как на самом деле происходит у вас или коллег?
🔥1
Сегодня несу вам задачу! Называться будет "Схема для совещания"; вопрос серьезный и злободневный. Итак. Вы -- менеджер команды разработки в большой IT-компании. Ваша команда прорабатывает реализацию <сложной логики поведения>. Приоритизация заказов, распределение ресурсов между клиентами, рекламный автобюджет, автоскейлинг, что-нибудь в таком духе. Логика поведения сложная, то есть нетривиально зависит от многих …
🔥2✍1
Как тимлиду облажаться с похвалой: 3 базовых способа Часть первая, про критику: https://t.me/fisheye_pm/16 Итак, как облажаться с похвалой (подкрепляющей обратной связью): 😭 Не хвалить вообще. Я как-то своими ушами слышала, как руководитель говорит своим подчиненным: "похвалить себя вы сами похвалите, а я сейчас расскажу где надо лучше". Не будьте такими 😭 Хвалить только тогда, когда надо покритиковать; как часть…
🔥4💯1
Хвалите сотрудников, помогайте экономить на психотерапевтах
😁4❤1🔥1
Showing the 12 most recent of 18 posts we hold for @fisheye_pm. 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 — 797,414 of 1,350,102entries 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.
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 10 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Прибор тимлидского зрения” (@fisheye_pm), 50 subscribers as measured 10 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/fisheye_pm.
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.