Ao vivo no YouTube na UCL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=608eBN3033A
❤4👍1

Channel
@josueramos
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Cite this entry
2,215subscribers
-41 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001326754918 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @josueramos |
| Created | Between 1 March 2018 and 31 August 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 7 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 11 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 7 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/josueramos |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Sept 2026, 17:20 | 2,215 | -7 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 01:54 | 2,222 | -3 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 23:16 | 2,225 | -4 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 19:48 | 2,229 | -6 |
| 24 Aug 2026, 17:13 | 2,235 | -5 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 22:35 | 2,240 | -6 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 18:33 | 2,246 | -1 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 15:47 | 2,247 | -7 |
| 11 Aug 2026, 10:24 | 2,254 | -1 |
| 8 Aug 2026, 09:13 | 2,255 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 21:32 | 2,256 | first reading |
14 posts held, back to 17 September 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 page 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 14 posts for this entry, the most recent from 10 December 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
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.
158 reactions across 11 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.1% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 65 | 41.1% | |
| 👏 | 36 | 22.8% | |
| 👍 | 32 | 20.3% | |
| 🔥 | 19 | 12.0% | |
| 🐳 | 3 | 1.90% | |
| 🤝 | 2 | 1.27% | |
| 🤔 | 1 | 0.633% |
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 14 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 158 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 14 most recent posts we hold, published 17 September 2025 to 10 December 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.
Ao vivo no YouTube na UCL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=608eBN3033A
❤4👍1
Video, posted without a caption
👍16
Eu tô aqui com esse projeto pois tô bem cansado dessa massa. Não suporto para onde foi essa comunidade. Nossa maioria é de idiotas e fanfarrões. Infelizmente pela falta de presença de pessoas bem enquadradas e com base científica. Ninguém vai usar nossos agentes para engolir a liquidez com stakes absurdas. Já garanti isso em acordos. E fiz acordo direto em liquidez. Pois para vocês entenderem, casas de apostas parti…
❤27🔥8
Assim, isso começou por uma fala de um médico, ele me disse que se eu não parasse o meu ritmo, a doença iria me parar. Tenho uma autoimune. Eu disse, ela que tente. Bem, ela me parou. Mas a partir disso comecei a pensar em algo para executar ações por mim. Fiz para cripto, e depois pensei em fazer o mesmo para apostas. Mas para apostas era algo muito mais complexo. Não existia bots iguais ao que eu queria, nenhum Pro…
👏14❤3👍2🔥1
Hoje eu tô preguiçoso. Mas explicando o motivo de não fechar tecnologia e nem nada. Não faz sentido, quero atingir mercado. Criar valuation forte e abrir as portas para o HighScore e também para mais esportes dentro do Oddsfy. E uma coisa que não comentei no Insta. Os dados de treino da AI na AWS estão sendo colocados já na Amazon Braket. Mas por enquanto só como validador.
👏6
Photo, posted without a caption
👍3🔥1
Chegamos a mil apostas feitas em testes dessa fase. Cada agente sendo testado de forma minuciosa. Agente Skynet3 (bot3) mereceu esse nome e segue moendo e fazendo volume, mas agora tem um concorrente. Vader já surge com consistência e volume. Algumas surpresas negativas e algumas positivas. Mas agentes que não fazem volume não me interessam. Em 1 mês esperamos ter tudo preparado para receber as primeiras pessoas pa…
❤21🔥7👏5
A partir da próxima semana vou começar a consultar mais a galera para alguns ajustes finos que serão feitos na base. Por hora, agentes mais sólidos já validados, e agentes novos sendo avaliados na quarentena. Validação não é só feita por volume aqui (quantidade) e sim métricas de eficiência. Ex: quanto tempo esse agente permaneceu dentro do caminho do valor esperado. Shewhart, desvio padrão, ARL, PIDC, entre outros.…
👏11❤3🐳3👍2🔥2🤔1
Opção 4
Qual a opção que mais gostaram?
The shares total 103%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Opção 2
Opção 3
❤1
Showing the 12 most recent of 14 posts we hold for @josueramos. 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.
Qual a opção que mais gostaram?
The shares total 103%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not 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 14 most recent posts we hold, published 17 September 2025 to 10 December 2025. 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.
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 7 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Canal Josué Ramos” (@josueramos), 2,215 subscribers as measured 7 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/josueramos.
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.