Other / unclassifiable — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 84% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
Observations
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Content that also appears on other registered channels
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 3 other registered channels. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
Matching posts — open both and compare (6 of the pairs behind the counts below)
Channels this entry shares post bodies with, where at least one matching post pair has no forward credit between the two channels, or to a common source, recorded in our data
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. 18 of the 18 matches recorded here fall after that date and carried no header when we read them. The rest predate reliable capture and are not evidence either way.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 86 comparable posts for this entry, running 5 August 2026 to 2 September 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Verbatim republication has three causes and the text separates only two: a clone/mirror, unattributed copy-paste, or BOTH channels copying a common third source that neither attributes. The spread filter (content held by at most 8 channels) reduces the third and does not remove it.
'Earliest' means earliest IN THIS CORPUS. A channel ingested one page deep will look younger than a neighbour ingested in full; corpus_coverage above is there to be checked before the direction is believed.
shared_verified_est extrapolates the sampled pass rate over the full narrow match count; sampled/passed are the numbers actually measured.
Absence of a forward header is not proof of intent: Telegram lets a channel disable forward attribution, and a credit written in the body is not parsed as attribution here (mention_edge_either_way above is the closest available signal).
Recorded under the keys clone_copy · clone_mutual, last confirmed 11 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
Growth
61 measurements spanning 97 days, net +1,234. 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 10,584–12,189 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 61
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
12 Nov 2026, 16:04
12,004
+14
10 Nov 2026, 13:08
11,990
+18
9 Nov 2026, 00:59
11,972
+15
7 Nov 2026, 17:20
11,957
-2
6 Nov 2026, 19:47
11,959
+12
5 Nov 2026, 18:30
11,947
+6
4 Nov 2026, 18:40
11,941
-6
3 Nov 2026, 17:10
11,947
-5
2 Nov 2026, 18:56
11,952
+48
1 Nov 2026, 15:26
11,904
+18
31 Oct 2026, 12:48
11,886
+35
30 Oct 2026, 11:11
11,851
+50
29 Oct 2026, 12:56
11,801
+26
28 Oct 2026, 10:41
11,775
+56
27 Oct 2026, 10:17
11,719
+45
26 Oct 2026, 09:35
11,674
+49
25 Oct 2026, 10:36
11,625
+9
24 Oct 2026, 11:30
11,616
+46
23 Oct 2026, 09:19
11,570
+27
20 Oct 2026, 22:47
11,543
first reading
Engagement
221 posts held, back to 5 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 51 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 221 posts for this entry, the most recent from 2 September 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Reaction mix
126 reactions across 78 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 87.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
110
87.3%
👍
10
7.94%
🔥
3
2.38%
💯
2
1.59%
👎
1
0.794%
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 81 of the 221 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 126 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 221 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 2 September 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.
Advertising
Ad load
4.52%
10 of 221 posts carry an ad marker
Regulatory tokens
0
none — marked by hashtag only
Median views · ads
44.0
over 10 measured posts
Median views · rest
266
over 211 measured posts
An ad marker, not a judgement about a post. A post is counted here because it carries one of two explicit markings: an erid token, which Russian law has required on paid placements since 2022 and which is issued against a specific advertising contract, or a #реклама / #ad hashtag in the body, which is the channel declaring it itself. The first is documentary; the second is a self-declaration and is weaker. No classifier reads the text and decides — nothing on this site guesses that a post is an advertisement.
This is a floor, and it can only ever be a floor. A channel that runs paid placements without marking them produces no marker for us to count, and an unmarked ad is indistinguishable from an ordinary post on the public surface. The ad load above therefore means “the share of posts that declared themselves”, never “the share of posts that were paid for”. A low figure is not evidence of a channel that runs few ads.
Both figures are medians, and no ratio between them is published. Each is a view reading that actually occurred on a post, picked by percentile_disc rather than averaged, so one viral post cannot move it and no interpolated value is invented between two readings. They are printed side by side with the count behind each rather than as a ratio: an ad and an ordinary post are not otherwise matched — for topic, for length, for hour of day — so the gap between them is a description of two groups and not the effect of one being an ad.
Measured over the 221 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 2026 to 2 September 2026. Views are the latest single reading held for each post, and any reading at or above 1,000 is rounded by Telegram to three significant figures.
Showing the 12 most recent of 221 posts we hold for @free_internet8. 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.
Posts recorded as deleted after publishing
We recorded 15 posts on @free_internet8 as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
First seen missing
8 August 2026
Most recent seen missing
28 August 2026
Median time before seen missing
16 hours
Seen missing in the last 30 days
0
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 12 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Free internet and Safaricom” (@free_internet8), 12,004 subscribers as measured 12 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/free_internet8.
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.
