⚡️ MoonPulse 快訊 | @wublockchain12 BitMine 10-K 披露:净亏 63.13 亿美元,ETH 持仓增至 607 万枚
👍12🔥9❤2👏1🤩1

Channel
@moonspace
On this record: Topic · Observations · Channels linked by matching posts · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
15,172subscribers
-5,059 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1001502810088 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Usernames | @moonspace @moontok_channel |
| Created | Between 1 April 2021 and 31 March 2023 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 11 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 128 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 11 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/moonspace |
Crypto & trading — 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 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 89% 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 the other topics.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 2 other registered channels. This entry also forms a group of 2 channels linked by matching posts. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @cryptolistings/545456 Aug 2026, 13:25 UTC | @moonspace/9300 · this entry6 Aug 2026, 13:26 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @cryptolistings/545598 Aug 2026, 13:48 UTC | @moonspace/9311 · this entry8 Aug 2026, 13:48 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @cryptolistings/5458613 Aug 2026, 04:59 UTC | @moonspace/9326 · this entry13 Aug 2026, 04:59 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @moonspace/9403 · this entry28 Aug 2026, 03:28 UTC | @cryptolistings/5470528 Aug 2026, 03:29 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| @moonspace/9416 · this entry2 Sept 2026, 03:08 UTC | @cryptolistings/547322 Sept 2026, 03:09 UTC | 1.00 | 72 seconds |
| @cryptolistings/550855 Nov 2026, 04:21 UTC | @moonspace/9562 · this entry5 Nov 2026, 04:21 UTC | 1.00 | under a minute |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @cryptolistings | 15 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | under a minute | @cryptolistings (10–5) |
| @trendingcrypto | 9 (8/8 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 5 minutes | @trendingcrypto (9–0) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. 19 of the 19 matches recorded here fall after that date and carried no header when we read them. The rest predate reliable capture and are not evidence either way.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 99 comparable posts for this entry, running 2 August 2026 to 10 November 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Of the group of 2 channels, the one whose matching posts we hold earliest is @cryptolistings. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the key clone_copy, last confirmed 11 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
This channel is in a group of 2 registered channels linked by matching posts. Links are found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown in this list. “First” could only mean first in our own crawl, which depends on how deep we happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. Our one hand-check read 45 of the highest-confidence flagged pairs against the live Telegram pages. In 18 of them the live page showed a “Forwarded from” credit that our database had no record of, so reading that pair as an unattributed copy was wrong; the check did not measure who published first. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Near-verbatim matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 11 Nov 2026, 09:36 | 15,172 | -3 |
| 11 Nov 2026, 00:16 | 15,175 | -10 |
| 9 Nov 2026, 13:15 | 15,185 | no change |
| 9 Nov 2026, 11:54 | 15,185 | +2 |
| 8 Nov 2026, 06:46 | 15,183 | +1 |
| 8 Nov 2026, 01:05 | 15,182 | +4 |
| 7 Nov 2026, 03:30 | 15,178 | -6 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 22:41 | 15,184 | -6 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 01:17 | 15,190 | no change |
| 5 Nov 2026, 23:50 | 15,190 | -3 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 02:27 | 15,193 | +1 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 21:06 | 15,192 | -5 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 23:16 | 15,197 | +7 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 17:39 | 15,190 | +3 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 23:19 | 15,187 | no change |
| 2 Nov 2026, 18:26 | 15,187 | +7 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 21:20 | 15,180 | no change |
| 1 Nov 2026, 21:16 | 15,180 | +7 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 00:10 | 15,173 | no change |
| 31 Oct 2026, 21:20 | 15,173 | first reading |
183 posts held, back to 2 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 75 pages of 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 11 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 183 (2 August 2026 – 11 November 2026) |
| Views total | 85,673 |
| Reactions total | 1,117 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 11 Nov 2026, 06:56 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 25 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.
3,882 reactions across 183 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 34.4% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 1,335 | 34.4% | |
| 🔥 | 964 | 24.8% | |
| ❤ | 357 | 9.20% | |
| 👏 | 328 | 8.45% | |
| 🥰 | 305 | 7.86% | |
| 🤩 | 300 | 7.73% | |
| 🎉 | 287 | 7.39% | |
| 🤯 | 3 | 0.077% | |
| 😱 | 2 | 0.052% | |
| 😁 | 1 | 0.026% |
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 183 of the 183 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 3,882 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 183 most recent posts we hold, published 2 August 2026 to 11 November 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.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 1 of 53 posts held from the last 30 days (1.89%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
⚡️ MoonPulse 快訊 | @wublockchain12 BitMine 10-K 披露:净亏 63.13 亿美元,ETH 持仓增至 607 万枚
👍12🔥9❤2👏1🤩1
⚡️ MoonPulse 快訊 | @wublockchain12 以太坊基金会地址再抛1000枚ETH,价值约203万美元
👍10🤩4❤3🔥3🥰2
⚡️ MoonPulse 快訊 | @OnchainLens 7 SIBLINGS 购入 2200 万美元 ETH
👍10❤4🎉4🔥2🤩2👏1🥰1
🚨 JUST IN: 🇺🇸 U.S. INFLATION COMES IN HOTTER THAN EXPECTED - Core CPI: +0.3% MoM vs. +0.2% expected - Headline CPI: +0.4% MoM vs. +0.3% expected 🔥 Inflation remains sticky, raising concerns over the Fed's rate outlook x.com/MoontokOfficial/status/2120149240538165682
👍6🔥4🎉3🤩3🥰3👏2❤1
Signed Tweet Deck
🐰 Elysium Chain is Now Supported on Moontok! Explore Elysium tokens, track trading activity, and discover its growing ecosystem—all on Moontok. Your next Elysium discovery starts here. 🔗 https://moontok.io
🔥6👍5🎉4❤2👏2🤩2🥰1
☑️复盘 $牛逼 - MC: $1M → $10M ( 10X ) Moontok List https://moontok.io/bsc/0x9665f094d862f4d5c221843e019b463d3c607777 这是一个马斯克热度的中文梗 meme 币,今天 Elon Musk 发了推文:Chinese 𝕏 is 牛逼 自列出Moontok之后上涨10x 📺合约: 0x9665f094d862f4d5c221843e019b463d3c607777 🐦 推特: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2119629310969467053?a=evv4YIvMNv-UtIduPvI&s=20 我们提供的任何内容均不构成财务建议,纯属信息分享,请做好自己的考察并对自己的投资负责。
👍9🎉6🔥5🥰5👏2
Signed 公参 卜
⚡️ MoonPulse 快訊 | @TheBlockCo Nvidia永续合约24小时跌4%,因董事会调查黄仁勋与中国间谍关系
👍9🔥5❤3🎉2🤩2👏1
⚡️ MoonPulse 快訊 | @solidintel_x 10分钟内加密市场10亿美元爆仓
👍11🔥6🎉3👏1🥰1
☑️复盘 $STONK - MC: $11M → $410M ( 35X ) Moontok List https://moontok.io/solana/7a8xxAJBELDo6P9dikSYctdw6ce8F4mWr3ahcAD8Ao49 StonkFun 是一个用户可以在 StonkFun 上任意选择配对资产来发射新币,不只限于 SOL 或稳定币,以配对资产形式分给持有者(持有者能直接赚到真实资产,比如股票代币)。 项目在 11M MC 列出 Moontok 月兔之后一路飙升ATH至 410M MC,现已斩获 35X 的收益! 📺合约: 6GmAFSYs4gk3FDao5FzzySQpPZaWsa4rUJHacpMpUNgx 🌐网站: https://www.stonkfun.xyz/ 🐦 推特: https://x.com/LaunchOnSF ✈️ 电报: https://t.me/StonkFunXyz 我…
👍5🔥5👏4❤3🎉3🥰3🤩1
Signed 公参 卜
⚡️ MoonPulse 快訊 | @OdailyChina 何一发起产品建议奖励:10条优质建议每人奖1 BNB
👍9🔥6❤4👏3🎉1🤩1🥰1
🚨 MoonPulse快讯 某黑客以20倍杠杆做多价值1284万美元BTC,并做空1283万美元ETH
🔥8👍6🎉3🥰3👏1🤩1
Posted without readable text
👍12❤5🔥5🥰2🤩1
Signed MoonGrok
Showing the 12 most recent of 183 posts we hold for @moonspace. 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.
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 92 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. The 24 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
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.
@moonspace named 9 handles 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.
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 4 October 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
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 23 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists 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 11 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Moontok 月兔” (@moonspace), 15,172 subscribers as measured 11 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/moonspace.
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.