Channel

૮꒰˶ᵔ ᗜ ᵔ˶꒱ა

@leopaskissers

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry

5subscribers

+0 since we began measuring on 14 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID	-1002195558929
Type	Channel
Username	@leopaskissers
Created	4 June 2024 — measured — dated from the channel’s first post
First recorded	14 August 2026
Last confirmed live	15 August 2026
Measurements held	2
On Telegram	t.me/leopaskissers

Growth

2 measurements taken within a single day. 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 4–6 and does not start at zero.

Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)	Subscribers	Change
14 Aug 2026, 07:01	5	no change
14 Aug 2026, 06:49	5	first reading

Engagement

3 posts held, back to 4 June 2024 — 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.

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 9 July 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.

What this channel posts

Photos: 1
Links: 1

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 14 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

36 reactions across 2 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 27.8% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction	Count	Share
custom 5920397029221079319	10	27.8%
custom 5386834311485879461	7	19.4%
custom 5920018578177791997	6	16.7%
custom 5920517322665105796	6	16.7%
custom 5386398337945596199	5	13.9%
custom 5386646896292954759	2	5.56%

Custom emoji. Every 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 counts beside them areTelegram’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 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 36reactions 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 4 June 2024 to 9 July 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.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 1,406,837 of 1,481,217entries 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.

𖦹 ׂ 𓈒 🥞 ／ ⋆ ۪
@castoricewife · 110 posts пост вз инфо вилки
@BlitzoBuckzoRelate · 51 post

Names

Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.

𖦹 ׂ 𓈒 🥞 ／ ⋆ ۪
@castoricewife · 11 post ﹫ 𝖺𝖽𝖺𝗉𝗍𝖾𝗋
@ladyrediska · 11 post

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: 1; handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone: 0; we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive: 1; vacant every time we have ever looked

@leopaskissers named 1 handle 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.

Never seen alive

References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.

@somi1chan
named in 1 post, 15 August 2026 – 15 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 14 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“૮꒰˶ᵔ ᗜ ᵔ˶꒱ა” (@leopaskissers), 5 subscribers as measured 14 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/leopaskissers.

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.