Channel
@igamingtextlab
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
787subscribers
+1 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002063097689 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @igamingtextlab |
| Created | Between 1 November 2023 and 31 May 2024— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 8 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 8 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/igamingtextlab |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Aug 2026, 03:03 | 787 | +1 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 01:46 | 786 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 18:49 | 786 | first reading |
13 posts held, back to 21 July 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. It is computed over the 12 of 13 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 13 (21 July 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 2,674 |
| Reactions total | 126 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 01:46 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.
Measured directly from 2 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no ≈ mark.
126 reactions across 12 posts, in 15 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 31.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 39 | 31.0% | |
| ❤ | 38 | 30.2% | |
| 👍 | 14 | 11.1% | |
| ✍ | 6 | 4.76% | |
| 😁 | 6 | 4.76% | |
| 👻 | 4 | 3.17% | |
| 🤡 | 4 | 3.17% | |
| 👏 | 3 | 2.38% | |
| 😎 | 3 | 2.38% | |
| 🙏 | 2 | 1.59% | |
| 🤔 | 2 | 1.59% | |
| 🦄 | 2 | 1.59% | |
| ⚡ | 1 | 0.794% | |
| 🐳 | 1 | 0.794% | |
| 🤝 | 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 12 of the 13 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 126reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 13 most recent posts we hold, published 21 July 2026 to 7 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.
🔥 Тренды июня–июля по нашим проектам 1. Шквал редактуры и переписанные ТЗ Всё в мире стремительно меняется, а некоторые вещи остаются неизменными. Например, вал задач на редактуру после очередного апдейта. Сценарий уже знакомый: компании масштабируют производство контента с помощью ИИ, тексты некоторое время успешно держатся в выдаче, а после апдейта часть страниц теряет позиции и требует серьёзной доработки. Впро…
❤5🔥3😁1
Audit в Human-Assisted AI: как проверить, какие требования ИИ действительно выполнил? В одном из предыдущих постов я рассказывал про Editorial Policy: клиент загружает редполитику, а мы подключаем её к каждому новому проекту. Только мы уже выяснили, что наличие правил в контексте ещё не означает, что модель соблюдёт каждое из них. Одно требование она может пропустить, другое понять слишком широко, а третьим пожертв…
❤5🔥4🦄2🐳1
Кстати, по поводу "восстания из пепла ядерного огня" — решила освежить в памяти цитату и посмотреть оригинал. Однако. Действие первой сцены происходит в 2029 году 🌚 Короче, надо продержаться 3 года до возвращения старого доброго SEO :) 👻 — кнопка для переписи олдов тут
👻4😎3❤1
А помните старые добрые времена, когда ТЗ можно было верить? Конечно, бывали разные казусы, но они случались редко, были понятны и решались за пять минут. А потом появился ИИ. "И восстали машины из пепла ядерного огня, и пошла война на уничтожение нормальных ТЗ" 🤡 Теперь наш обычный рабочий день выглядит так: — Здравствуйте, присылаю вам ТЗ — Здравствуйте, принимаем в работу. Постойте, но такого сайта не существу…
🔥5✍2🤔2
🇷🇸 У iGamingTextLab с Сербией особая связь: здесь живёт значительная часть наших ключевых сотрудников. И в последнее время мы всё чаще получаем от людей из нашей индустрии вопросы о местном рынке труда: кого нанимать, сколько платить сотрудникам и как перевезти команду. Поэтому на основе обзора LENKEP мы подготовили материал с главными фактами о релокации бизнеса в Сербию. ➡️ Полный обзор «Переезжаем в Сербию. Обз…
❤5👍4🔥4🤡1
🔥 Клиенты прислали первые результаты по страницам с контентом от Human-Assisted AI Самая ранняя тестовая группа поделилась с нами вот такими скринами. GEO: Индия, Греция и Венгрия. Все проекты на скринах успешно пережили июньский Google Update 🎉 Сейчас у разных клиентов страницы набирают показы, клики и органический трафик. В одном из проектов материалы начали расти практически с нуля, в другом уже принесли 416 кл…
❤5👍5🔥5🤡2
Video message, posted without a caption
🔥6👍5🤡1
Video message, posted without a caption
❤7🙏2
🔍 Рубрика — FAQ о Human-Assisted AI Почему мы не даем в открытый доступ наш инструмент, а продаем как услугу? Отвечает наша любимая Head of Content — Алина, которая стояла у истоков создания инструмента. Задавайте ещё вопросы в комментариях — на всё постараемся ответить :)
🔥4❤2
Как заставить ИИ запоминать правила проекта и не искажать их со временем? Это был один из первых вопросов, которые мы решали на уровне архитектуры, когда собирали инструмент под наш Human-Assisted AI. Проблема знакома всем, кто много работает с моделями: и в массмаркетных ИИ, и в кастомных инструментах. Со временем модель начинает трактовать правила проекта по-своему или терять их. А когда требования дорабатываются…
✍4❤2🔥2👏1
⬆️ Это я наслушалась советов из Интернета и пытаюсь относиться к ИИ как к джуну-человеку. Результат — примерно как на видео. Хотя, будем честны, у всех нас поначалу случались именно такие первые рабочие дни. Но есть одно важное отличие. Мы учимся. ИИ, конечно, тоже. Но это не отменяет того, что в самый ответственный момент он может забыть важное правило, вернуть запрещённую формулировку или переиначить вводные на …
😁5❤3⚡1🤝1
А вы за кого болели в финале ЧМ?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Signed Daria Kochkina
Showing the 12 most recent of 13 posts we hold for @igamingtextlab. 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.
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
А вы за кого болели в финале ЧМ?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.
The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.
Read from the 13 most recent posts we hold, published 21 July 2026 to 7 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.
Citation-graph rank — 325,609 of 1,160,990entries 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.
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.
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.
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.
“iGaming Text Lab - блог про контент в iGaming” (@igamingtextlab), 787 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/igamingtextlab.
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.