Channel
@leraizbutovo
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
1,897subscribers
+68 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001591700221 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @leraizbutovo |
| Created | 11 March 2022 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 13 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 15 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/leraizbutovo |
Politics & activism — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 16 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 99% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and why it has no browse page of its own yet.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Sept 2026, 13:21 | 1,897 | +12 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 07:18 | 1,885 | +2 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 11:40 | 1,883 | -4 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 13:35 | 1,887 | +1 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 07:42 | 1,886 | -6 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 05:04 | 1,892 | +3 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 02:42 | 1,889 | +6 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 08:53 | 1,883 | +17 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 12:44 | 1,866 | +37 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 17:04 | 1,829 | +3 |
| 12 Aug 2026, 11:14 | 1,826 | -4 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 16:00 | 1,830 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 08:18 | 1,829 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 24 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 2 pages 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 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 7 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
838 reactions across 18 posts, in 20 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 26.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 😁 | 224 | 26.7% | |
| ❤ | 216 | 25.8% | |
| 💯 | 113 | 13.5% | |
| 👍 | 91 | 10.9% | |
| 🤬 | 43 | 5.13% | |
| 🔥 | 34 | 4.06% | |
| 🥴 | 28 | 3.34% | |
| 🌭 | 15 | 1.79% | |
| 🤯 | 13 | 1.55% | |
| 👎 | 12 | 1.43% | |
| 😍 | 12 | 1.43% | |
| ✍ | 8 | 0.955% | |
| 🕊 | 8 | 0.955% | |
| ❤🔥 | 6 | 0.716% | |
| 🤔 | 6 | 0.716% | |
| 💔 | 3 | 0.358% | |
| 🫡 | 3 | 0.358% | |
| 🎉 | 1 | 0.119% | |
| 💘 | 1 | 0.119% | |
| 🤝 | 1 | 0.119% |
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 20 of the 20 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 959 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 24 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.
ОРУУУ как ЛДПР пытается подыгрывать городскому женскому электорату, учитывая то, что оба лидера ЛДПР славились отвратительным отношением к женщинам: Жириновский оскорблял, кричал, нападал на женщин. Он регулярно заявлял, что политика — не женское дело, а удел женщины сидеть дома, варить борщ и воспитывать детей. В ток-шоу он регулярно называл оппоненток дурами, сумасшедшими, проститутками. Найдется умник, который с…
💯27👍6❤2👎2😁1
Какой кошмар! Эти честные люди живут в РФ с 90-ых, а на Алтае с 2016 года примерно, работают, воспитывают детей, занимаются фермерством и помогают Церкви и их хотят выдворить из РФ. Не удивлюсь, если они признаны "угрозой безопасности". Это чудовищные вещи происходят. Да сколько уже можно издеваться над людьми, разлучать семьи? Очень сильная поддержка Уолкеру и всей семье. Нужно обжаловать такое в суде, идти, вплот…
❤38💯10❤🔥2🤔1🤬1
Семью Джастаса Уолкера, американского фермера с Алтая, хотят выдворить из России. https://t.me/JustusWalker/837
🤬30
Пишут, что это СУ-35, который перешел на сверхзвук. Сейчас все-таки думаю, так и есть. Если бы был взрыв или еще что-то, уже были бы видео с задымлением. Другие подробности пока неизвестны.
🥴13🌭6❤4🫡2👎1
На востоке Мск было слышно тоже, но не так сильно, хотя затряслись окна. Мои знакомые сообщают, что по всей Москве действительно было слышно этот звук, сильнее — в центре, а наиболее отчетливо — на юго-западе. Че происходит, где официальная информация... https://t.me/mskint/16829
🤯13👍2🌭1🥴1
Москва, недалеко от Тверской. Кто придумал этот дизайн, КТО? ПРИ КАКИХ ОБСТОЯТЕЛЬСТВАХ? Почему он похож то ли на алкаша, то ли на Олега Монгола...сколько было потрачено денег на это? Господи, как же страшно.
😁78💯8🤬5💔3❤1🌭1
Наблюдаю за тем, как люди спорят, за кого голосовать — за Новых людей или за Яблоко. И заметила несколько любопытных вещей. Во-первых, даже те, кто ещё несколько лет назад был провоенным или менее оппозиционно настроенным, сейчас парадоксально сдвинулись в сторону Новых людей. Спектр сейчас выглядит не так, что на одном конце ЕР, например, ЛДПР, СР, а на другом НЛ и Яблоко, он выглядит как: Яблоко и Новые люди. За …
🔥27❤7👍5🤔5👎2🥴1
Оруууу, нарочно не придумаешь))
😁36🔥7
Политический ритуализм — очень важная ведь в любых системах, но в постсоветской РФ некоторые ритуалы оказываются особо комическими и удивительными. В СССР такие бюрократические ритуалы носили названия «очковтирательство» или «показуха» и были развиты до абсолютного гротеска. На прилавки магазинов временно «выбрасывали» дефицитные продукты (колбасу, икру, бананы), которые исчезали сразу после отъезда чиновников. Доро…
💯21🤬7👍4❤1🤝1🫡1
Вышло любопытное исследование "Атласа выборов" о медийной активности разных партий в Интернете за 6 недель избирательной кампании. Что мы имеем: Яблоко почти догнало НЛ по охвату и числу обсуждений. Рост произошёл преимущественно из‑за интереса к новостям о снятии кандидатов и судебных разбирательствах. ЕР и СР имеют огромный отрыв от остальных по просмотрам (90,7 и 36,3 млн), но в основном за счёт многократного ко…
❤12✍7👍2
Наблюдаю за тем, как разгорается скандал, в котором Монеточку* отменяют за клип, сделанный с помощью нейросетей. Первое что мне бросилось в глаза , это то как абстрактные разговоры «а заменят ли нас роботы в 2050-м» все больше и больше заменяется конкретикой , что свидетельствует о том что , дискуссия об ИИ окончательно превратилась из футуристического будущего в наше настоящее. Я считаю, что любую технологию надо …
❤29🥴12💯9🌭3👎2✍1👍1
Какую инициативу вы бы поддержали?
The shares total 155%, 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.
👍6👎5❤2
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @leraizbutovo. 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 2 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Какую инициативу вы бы поддержали?
The shares total 155%, 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.
Представьте, что выборы пройдут в эти выходные. За какую партию вы проголосовали бы, если бы пошли на выборы?
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 20 most recent posts we hold, published 24 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.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Republishes
Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.
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 14 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.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 15 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Лера — и точка” (@leraizbutovo), 1,897 subscribers as measured 15 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/leraizbutovo.
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.