Other / unclassifiable — 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 24 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 45% 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.
Growth
5 measurements spanning 25 days, net +65. 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 120–209 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
18 Sept 2026, 09:19
199
+69
9 Sept 2026, 12:56
130
-2
31 Aug 2026, 15:48
132
-2
24 Aug 2026, 04:15
134
no change
24 Aug 2026, 04:01
134
first reading
Engagement
17 posts held, back to 16 August 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 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 17 posts for this entry, the most recent from 23 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
Reaction mix
42 reactions across 17 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 85.7% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👎
36
85.7%
custom 5371074117971745503
6
14.3%
Custom emoji. One 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 count beside it is Telegram’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 17 of the 17 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 42 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 17 most recent posts we hold, published 16 August 2026 to 23 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.
Какие же все таки утырки у нас в комьюнити
Самоиронию - не воспринимают
Хороший менеджмент - не воспринимают
Грамотный контент - не воспринимают
Это настолько тупо, что изза этих всех челов так и получается, что командам в итоге просто напросто не интересно делать что либо для медиа. Вот всегда реально казалось, что нормальную фан базу лишь в хг сделали, даже с учетом того, что оно маленькое. Там за все мое время не…
Как же я ненавижу все эти ярмарки. Каждый 1 метр типы стоят, душно. Чуть позже скину че происходит у меня тут
(Из позитивного лишь ахуенные готки с альтухами))
Чет много новостей в последнее время.
GGerman выпустил подкаст с SuLik. Съемка очень нравится, звук тоже. Одним словом, продакшен мега хороший с рандомными вопросами
Жалко, что такие старания не окупятся как-либо на данном (и, скорей всего, на следующих этапах), но одно сказать могу точно — шикарно
Вот ссылка на подкаст, мб кто-то посмотрит
И да, к слову: Герман даже норм интервьюер. Мб ему на официалках дать ивент…
Еще могу понять людей, которые жалуются на то, что спрос на киберов в плане зарплат растет, а количество рекламодателей и партнеров — нет. Из-за этого содержание составов становится все дороже, а заработать на них практически невозможно
Но лично я считаю, что это скорее положительный момент, чем отрицательный
Положительный — для игроков. Отрицательный — для новых организаций
По сути, рост зарплат показывает, что рас…
По поводу рекламы ничего не могу сказать. Видно, что с прошлого раза чуть сменили риторику, но в основном все осталось так же. Опять же, все можно свалить на неопытность, но каждый раз через пробы и ошибки получается все лучше и лучше
Слишком много "но" получается. В любом случае: взяли бы того, кто имеет опыт в этой сфере, — скорее всего, результат был бы другим (на себя не намекаю, но все же)
Промо ролик у абсолютов хорошо получился. Но слишком сильно слышно нейронку, особенно в озвучке в конце. А так хорошо, ниче не вижу плохого в использовании ии
Showing the 12 most recent of 17 posts we hold for @milansmm. 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.
Polls
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.
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 17 most recent posts we hold, published 16 August 2026 to 23 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.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
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.
МУВИС | Фильмы и сериалы @kinofilmy_seriali · 109,420 Telegram ranks this channel #23 of 51 here — alongside 50 others — read 24 August 2026
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.
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 18 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“milan - smm” (@milansmm), 199 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/milansmm.
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.
