18 measurements spanning 17 days, net +1,037. 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 20,274–21,623 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
24 Aug 2026, 23:19
21,467
+113
23 Aug 2026, 06:27
21,354
+78
21 Aug 2026, 16:16
21,276
+62
20 Aug 2026, 16:18
21,214
+61
19 Aug 2026, 18:33
21,153
+62
18 Aug 2026, 20:37
21,091
+54
17 Aug 2026, 20:56
21,037
+36
16 Aug 2026, 18:56
21,001
+88
15 Aug 2026, 06:36
20,913
+69
14 Aug 2026, 00:17
20,844
+86
12 Aug 2026, 21:56
20,758
+44
12 Aug 2026, 00:53
20,714
+64
11 Aug 2026, 03:13
20,650
+73
10 Aug 2026, 00:31
20,577
+57
8 Aug 2026, 23:19
20,520
+57
7 Aug 2026, 23:34
20,463
+33
7 Aug 2026, 16:00
20,430
no change
7 Aug 2026, 15:53
20,430
first reading
Engagement
3 posts held, back to 7 March 2025 — the reader has reached the start of this channel’s public history, so this is the full archive Telegram still exposes. Read across 39 pagesof 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 3 posts for this entry, the most recent from 7 March 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
What this channel posts
Photos
2
Links
2
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 25 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.
Reaction mix
524 reactions across 2 posts, in 8 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 80.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
421
80.3%
👍
59
11.3%
🥰
14
2.67%
👏
11
2.10%
👎
8
1.53%
😁
5
0.954%
😈
4
0.763%
💔
2
0.382%
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 2 of the 3 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 524reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 3 most recent posts we hold, published 7 March 2025 to 7 March 2025, 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 3 most recent of 3 posts we hold for @hlwn1_com. 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 edited after publishing
@hlwn1_com edited 1 post after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
8 August 2026
Most recent edit
24 August 2026
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 140,586 of 1,602,822entries 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.
Mentions
Named by 2 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
2
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
1
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
1
vacant every time we have ever looked
@hlwn1_com named 2 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.
@heiliao26 named in 6 posts, 8 August 2026 – 18 August 2026 · confirmed gone 12 August 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@hlw_rmhl named in 6 posts, 8 August 2026 – 18 August 2026
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 24 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“黑料网-最新回家地址-不迷路导航” (@hlwn1_com), 21,467 subscribers as measured 24 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/hlwn1_com.
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.
