Channel
@nadia_i_istorii
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
1,309subscribers
-1 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1001164039886 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @nadia_i_istorii |
| Created | 9 October 2020 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 13 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 2 times, most recently 13 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/nadia_i_istorii |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 9 Aug 2026, 21:50 | 1,309 | -1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 11:50 | 1,310 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 09:57 | 1,310 | first reading |
8 posts held, back to 18 August 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 pageof 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 27 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 8 (18 August 2025 – 27 July 2026) |
| Views total | 277 |
| Reactions total | 28 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 6 Aug 2026, 11:50 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.
291 reactions across 8 posts, in 7 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 57.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 166 | 57.0% | |
| 🔥 | 94 | 32.3% | |
| 👍 | 10 | 3.44% | |
| 🤔 | 10 | 3.44% | |
| 😱 | 5 | 1.72% | |
| 🎉 | 4 | 1.37% | |
| 😁 | 2 | 0.687% |
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 8 of the 8 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 291reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 8 most recent posts we hold, published 18 August 2025 to 27 July 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.
нет ни одной проблемы, с которой бы не справились мои (потенциальные в т.ч.) клиентки — думаю каждый раз, узнавая новые способы чето делать. хочу составить список того, чему я научилась за эти 6 лет практики. психотерапия — двусторонний процесс
❤18🔥8👍2
вообще, если вдруг вам поставили диагноз и из-за этого вы почувствовали себя больными, поломанными и «недостаточно нормальными», советую почитать историю и критику DSM 5 и 5-tr. там и связь с фарма-бизнесом, и провал классификации по генетическим предрасположенностям и многое другое интересное в комментариях приведу цитаты
🔥10
в версии DSM* 1980 года существовало пассивно-агрессивное расстройство личности. симптомы: — раздражается, когда персону просят делать то, что она не хочет — прокрастинирует — считает требования чрезмерными — не любит советы по повышению продуктивности — критикует начальство меня завораживает тонкая историческая грань между психиатрическим расстройством и неудобностью для окружающих) * DSM — диагностическое и ста…
❤24🤔1😁1
провела с железодефицитной анемией в обнимку последние месяцы. вчера была первая из 8 капельниц железа. клиенткам я всегда говорю что если нет сил — можно сначала проверить ферритин, щитовидку и витамин Д. сама же пошла проверять только когда стало уже совсем невыносимо) в инсте (https://www.instagram.com/i.prefer.not.to) я выложила список анализов и мой маршрут по страховой+врачам до капельницы в Тбилиси. сюда тож…
❤13🔥3
вирус стерильного времени. как сопротивляться? 1. не-результат. держите в голове, что продуктивность — только одна из традиций. вспомните, как еще вы получаете удовольствие от жизни. вам точно доступны другие логики, вне производительности. из стерильного времени можно уйти в отпуск, праздник неповиновения, прыгнуть в целебную грязь неконтролируемости 2. не-оправдания. мы приучены самостоятельно вычищать время, пос…
🔥40❤26👍6
🌚 попрыгунья-стрекоза лето красное пропела. если у вас уже начало подгорать, или стал подкрадываться стыд — сейчас расскажу, что с басней не так. напомню лор: стрекоза приходит к муравью голодная и замёрзшая, и просит кормить её до весны. муравей спрашивает «а летом ты чего делала, плясала? ну вот и иди пляши дальше». 🐜 муравей решает проучить стрекозу вместо того, чтобы попытаться организовать помощь. наверно из л…
❤31🔥19😱3😁1
принесла подборку норм каналов 👍 схема-терапевтка Катя Зебзеева ясно, понятно пишет о научно доказанной психологии ❤️ ⚫️тут совсем некатегоричный видеогайд, как поддержать себя после расставания ⚫️здесь Катя верит, что человеку нужен человек, но ситуации разные, поэтому поделилась промтами для психотерапевтической работы с нейросетями ⚫️а вот объясняет, почему в любой непонятной ситуации — следует принять лесную ва…
❤13
что, если СДВГ — не дефицит? психиатрия любит описывать состояния «недостатками», но есть и альтернативные взгляды. например то, что людям с СДВГ наоборот нужно больше стимулов и переключений, потому что нашего внимания больше, чем у людей без СДВГ
❤41🔥14🤔9🎉4👍2😱2
Showing the 8 most recent of 8 posts we hold for @nadia_i_istorii. 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.
Citation-graph rank — 1,013,085 of 1,481,243entries 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.
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.
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.
@nadia_i_istorii 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.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
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 9 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“терапия эпохи апокалипсиса 🫀нарративная практика” (@nadia_i_istorii), 1,309 subscribers as measured 9 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/nadia_i_istorii.
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.