Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for НеВнирване

Channel

НеВнирване

@neVnirvane

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

576subscribers

-1 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

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

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001978660177
TypeChannel
Username@neVnirvane
CreatedBetween 1 April 2023 and 31 October 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live16 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 16 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/neVnirvane

Growth

576577576.57 August 2026 — 577 subscribers8 August 2026 — 577 subscribers16 August 2026 — 576 subscribers7 August 202616 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 9 days, net -1. 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 576–577 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
16 Aug 2026, 04:36576-1
8 Aug 2026, 09:01577no change
7 Aug 2026, 10:48577first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 19 March 2026the 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 · 30 days
11.5%
avg views ÷ 576 subscribers
Avg views / post
66.2
5 posts measured
Reaction rate
23.9%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
5
of 20 held

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.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026
Posts held20 (19 March 20267 August 2026)
Views total331
Reactions total79
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken7 Aug 2026, 10:48 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.

Reaction mix

387 reactions across 19 posts, in 17 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.1% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
15941.1%
🔥9324.0%
👍266.72%
🤔225.68%
😁215.43%
💯184.65%
👏153.88%
❤‍🔥71.81%
🕊71.81%
💊41.03%
😢41.03%
🤗30.775%
🤯30.775%
👎20.517%
💩10.258%
😍10.258%
🤣10.258%

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 19 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 387reactions 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 19 March 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
1
across the posts below
Posts paid on
1
of 20 we hold a reading for · 5%
Most on one post
1
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @neVnirvane. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.

Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.

This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.

Counted over the 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 19 March 2026 to 7 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.

Recent posts

7 Aug 2026, 10:21 UTC8 views4 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Просто – это легко? Все просто: действуй иначе. Правда легко? Ага, щас! Это ваше "просто" — очень тяжело. И знаете почему? Потому что наш опыт — это не просто воспоминание. Это зафиксированные чувства. Которые сидят в теле, в мышцах, в дыхании. Которые включаются раньше, чем мы успеваем подумать. Ты хочешь сказать "нет" — а внутри уже скрутило. Потому что в прошлый раз, когда ты сказал "нет", тебя наказали. Или о

💊31

Signed Антон Агеев

29 Jul 2026, 09:50 UTC66 views22 reactions1 Starread 7 August 2026

Про то, как мы создаём свои чувства Лиза Барретт перевернула всё, что мы знали об эмоциях. Оказывается, эмоции — это не врождённые реакции. Не рефлексы. Не то, что случается с нами против воли. Эмоции — это конструкции. Мы их собираем сами. Каждый раз. Заново. Как это работает? Мозг получает сигналы от тела: сердцебиение, дыхание, напряжение мышц. Это просто данные. Как цифры на приборной панели. Сами по себе они

9🔥8👏5

Signed Антон Агеев

24 Jul 2026, 10:02 UTC92 views18 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Почему один и тот же опыт одних парализует, а других — делает сильнее Один человек падает с велосипеда в детстве и больше никогда не садится на него. Другой падает, разбивает колени, плачет, зализывает раны — и снова садится. Третий вообще не падает, но почему-то боится велосипедов всю жизнь, хотя ни разу с них не падал. В чём разница? Не в событии. Событие одно и то же. Разница — в том, что остаётся внутри. В то

8🔥7🤗3

Signed Антон Агеев

24 Jul 2026, 09:35 UTC71 views18 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

На изображении админ, парящий от радости, получая ваши реакции! 🤗 Спасибо за сердечки, значит буду продолжать. ❤️‍🔥 Но прежде, чем продолжу, хочу сделать небольшую ремарку. 1. Ниже я буду рассказывать про чувства и эмоции – буду часто их смешивать, путать, и в данном контексте для меня нет принципиальной разницы между этими словами, хотя по факту эти различия есть. 2. Когда я говорю о застывшем чувстве – это не на

11❤‍🔥5🔥2

Signed Антон Агеев

21 Jul 2026, 10:47 UTC94 views17 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Значит рассказываю! Сергей совершенно правильно угадал намек на знаменитых обезьянок Мидзару, Кикадзару, Ивадзару, которые символизируют принцип «Если я не вижу зла, не слышу о зле и ничего не говорю о нём, то я защищён от него». Но если со злом все понятно, Конфуций писал: «Не смотри на то, что неправильно. Не слушай того, что неправильно. Не говори того, что неправильно. Не делай того, что неправильно.» И именно

15👍1😍1

Signed Антон Агеев

19 Jul 2026, 17:27 UTC98 viewsread 7 August 2026

Но есть нюанс... О нем скоро расскажу 🤫

Signed Антон Агеев

19 Jul 2026, 17:27 UTC105 views7 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Forwarded from @givemealisten

"Ничего не вижу, ничего не слышу" — это из трактата Конфуция "Лунь юй" — главной книги конфуцианства. Смысл в том, чтобы защищать сознание от дурного. Это легло в основу философии трёх обезьян: Мидзару🙈, Кикадзару🙉 и Ивадзару🙊.

🔥32👍2

Signed Антон Агеев

19 Jul 2026, 08:56 UTC101 views9 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Так мало теорий о Конфуции в моем абсурдном вопросе выше, что я задумался: откуда в нас это нежелание ошибиться? Даже там, где это сделать невозможно или не стыдно. Загадка действительно непростая. Так что подсказка на картинке😉

👍3🔥3🤔21

Signed Антон Агеев

17 Jul 2026, 11:00 UTC110 views15 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Конфуций в каждом из нас Так почему споры про стакан не утихают? Почему вместо того, чтобы видеть стакан, Человек видит только пустоту или только полноту? Всему виной наш опыт. И окружение, конечно, тоже. Но давай остановимся на опыте. Потому что он влияет на нас сильнее, чем всё вокруг. Да и окружение мы, как правило, выбираем исходя из нашего опыта. Опыт — это не просто "то, что было". Это фильтр. Через который

🔥76🤔2

Signed Антон Агеев

10 Jul 2026, 08:29 UTC124 views10 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Я бы так сказал! Так бы я сказал про оптимистов, а так бы я сказал про пессимистов, но знания психологии помогают мне взглянуть на ситуацию иначе, и нас самом деле и те, и другие меня не бесят… нет, бесят, но не сильно и не долго… Кстати, Чистые представители встречаются довольно редко. Но вернемся к нашим баранам пессимистам и оптимистам. Открою вам секрет: природа у данных представителей одна. Они не противопол

10

Signed Антон Агеев

9 Jul 2026, 12:00 UTC105 views18 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Жизнь не бывает только хорошей или только плохой. Она просто — есть. И единственный способ не пропустить её — не спорить. А замечать. Дождь. Луну. Друга рядом, пускай и с противоположным мнением.

11👍4💯3

Signed Антон Агеев

9 Jul 2026, 12:00 UTC109 views13 reactionsread 7 August 2026

В баре НеВнирвана Встретились как-то Оптимист и Пессимист. В баре. В НеВнирване. За одним столом. Случайно. Хотя какие случайности? Просто жизнь свела. — Жизнь прекрасна, — сказал Оптимист, поднимая бокал. — Всё к лучшему. Вселенная на нашей стороне. — Жизнь — дерьмо, — ответил Пессимист, не поднимая своего. — Всё к худшему. Вселенной на нас плевать. И понеслось. Спорили они долго. Часами. Днями. Годами. Потому ч

8🔥5

Signed Антон Агеев

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @neVnirvane. 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.

Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 1,063,448 of 1,550,164entries 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.

Forward network

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.

Mentions

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.

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 16 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“НеВнирване” (@neVnirvane), 576 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/neVnirvane.

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.