4 measurements spanning 7 days, net -10. 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 1,679–1,692 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
14 Aug 2026, 19:46
1,680
-9
11 Aug 2026, 06:24
1,689
-1
8 Aug 2026, 11:01
1,690
no change
7 Aug 2026, 16:48
1,690
first reading
Engagement
10 posts held, back to 10 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 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
15.4%
avg views ÷ 1,680 subscribers
Avg views / post
258
2 posts measured
Reaction rate
7.95%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
2
of 10 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 3 August 2026
Posts held
10 (10 May 2026 – 3 August 2026)
Views total
516
Reactions total
41
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Aug 2026, 16:48 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.
Reaction mix
310 reactions across 10 posts, in 5 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 36.5% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
custom 5436321117943929708
113
36.5%
❤
83
26.8%
🔥
63
20.3%
😍
42
13.5%
💘
9
2.90%
Custom emoji. One 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 count beside it isTelegram’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 10 of the 10 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 310reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 10 most recent posts we hold, published 10 May 2026 to 3 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.
Telegram Stars
Stars received
234
across the posts below
Posts paid on
10
of 10 we hold a reading for · 100%
Most on one post
34
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @harmful_creator. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.
Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.
This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.
Counted over the 10 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 10 May 2026 to 3 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.
я еще с прошлого года наблюдаю за mermaidcore, но сейчас этот стиль раскрылся с новой стороны
🐚если раньше его чаще уводили в какую-то спокойную пастельную эстетику, то сейчас это трансформировалось в яркую русалочью дискотеку 🪩⭐️
🔹главная фишка тут — игра на контрастах и глянце. в контенте это выглядит очень объемно: крупные пайетки, металлик, закатный оранжевый, фуксия, влажный макияж и много света. особенно крут…
как меня достал ии…
🔵ии — это классный инструмент, который реально экономит кучу времени. но я больше не могу видеть эти бесконечные ии-карточки: в магазинах, ресторанах, меню, афишах, сторис, презентациях
они уже буквально везде…
и проблема даже не в том, что они сделаны нейросетью. проблема в том, что у всех они одинаковые: один и тот же стиль, одна и та же эстетика, один и тот же вайб 😁
и каждый раз у меня возн…
ну что, кажется, это уже моё второе возвращение на канал в этом месяце 😄
но в этот раз — уже точно
после работы, учёбы и всей этой бесконечной суеты очень захотелось просто сделать небольшую передышку. поэтому я улетела отдыхать в хорватию, в дубровник. и это было именно то, что было нужно 🍪
мы очень много купались — море там просто невероятное: чистое, тёплое и какого-то нереального цвета 🐚🪼сам дубровник тоже поко…
всем привет 😃
я пропала почти на месяц, но май и начало июня выдались очень насыщенными
💎по работе у меня появились новые проекты, а ещё я наконец-то съездила домой в Питер. также на пару дней ездила в Москву, чтобы забрать свой диплом из уника, а потом ещё успела выбраться с друзьями в Швецию 🇸🇪
первую неделю июня я вообще проболела, видимо, где-то успела подхватить вирус, но сейчас уже всё хорошо (почти)
и ещё …
💎полка дот все не отпускает, поэтому я купила новую кофточку и сделала стикеры звездочки! ⭐️
для оформления просто супер! 💗
custom 543632111794392970822🔥12❤10
Showing the 10 most recent of 10 posts we hold for @harmful_creator. 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.
Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.
Mentions
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.
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 14 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“harmful_creator” (@harmful_creator), 1,680 subscribers as measured 14 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/harmful_creator.
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.
