Channel
@negah_farda
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
971subscribers
-7 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002322608581 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @negah_farda |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 15 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/negah_farda |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Aug 2026, 05:13 | 971 | -6 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 04:01 | 977 | -1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 15:49 | 978 | first reading |
16 posts held, back to 21 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 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. It is computed over the 15 of 16 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 2 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 16 (21 July 2026 – 2 August 2026) |
| Views total | 3,024 |
| Reactions total | 53 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 6 Aug 2026, 15:49 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.
53 reactions across 15 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 62.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 33 | 62.3% | |
| 😍 | 16 | 30.2% | |
| 👍 | 2 | 3.77% | |
| 👏 | 2 | 3.77% |
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 15 of the 16 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 53reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 16 most recent posts we hold, published 21 July 2026 to 2 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.
راستی اگه به هر دلیلی نمیتونین تو جلسات حضوری شرکت کنین، ما به صورت آنلاین هم داریم تو باشگاه کتابخونیمون کتاب رو پیش میبریم.💙 https://behkhaan.ir/profile/negah_farda?inviteCode=kMyFVs821O7s کافیه صفحه نگاه فردا رو تو اپلیکیشن بخوان دنبال کنین و از قسمت باشگاهها عضو باشگاه کتابخوانی نگاه فردا بشید. #باشگاه_کتابخوانی_نگاه_فردا @negah_farda
❤4
این ماه قراره هرشنبه دور هم جمع بشیم، کتاب بخونیم، مهارتهای ارتباطیمون رو ارتقا بدیم و باهم گفتوگو کنیم. 📚✨ اینم از لحظههای قشنگ جلسه اولمون که حسابی کنار شما کیف کردیم. 🙂↔️💙 #باشگاه_کتابخوانی_نگاه_فردا @negah_farda
❤3😍1
سلام از جلسه اول دورهمی کتابخونی سبکها و مهارتهای ارتباطی 📚🙂↔️💙 #باشگاه_کتابخوانی_نگاه_فردا @negah_farda
😍4❤1
از اونجایی که این دوره تعامل محوره و ما قراره کنار هم مهارتهای جدید یاد بگیریم و درموردشون باهم معاشرت کنیم، ظرفیت این دوره رو کاملا محدود درنظر گرفتیم که تایم کافی برای گفتوگوهای عمیق داشته باشیم.✨ تا پایان امروز مهلت واسه ثبتنام هست و فقط ۲ نفر دیگه ظرفیت داریم برای این دوره. پس اگه دوست دارین کنارهم مهارتهای ارتباطیمون رو رشد بدیم کافیه زودتر بهمون پیام بدین.😌💙
❤3
یکی از سوالات پرتکرار این چند روز این سوال بود. باید بگم که هیچ الزامی وجود نداره که کتاب رو خونده باشین!!! خوندن همزمان با دوره باعث تسلط و آمادگی بیشتر شما روی مطالب میشه ولی الزامی نیست. در طول جلسات ما واستون مطالب کتاب رو ارائه میدیم و بعد با هم بهگفتوگو درموردشون میشینیم. پس اگه هنوز کتاب رو تهیه نکردین نگران نباشین و با خیال راحت ثبتنامتون رو تکمیل کنین.🙂↔️💙 #باشگاه_کتابخوانی_نگاه_فردا @negah_farda
❤1😍1
این کتاب پر از مثالهای کاربردیه؛ از نحوه گفتوگو تو روابط نزدیک گرفته تا برخورد تو محیط کار یا حتی جمعهای خانوادگی! چیزی که ارزش خوندن این کتاب رو چند برابر میکنه اینه که هم بهت کمک میکنه خودت رو بهتر بشناسی، هم راهکار میده که بتونی سبک ارتباطیت رو تغییر بدی و به سمت قاطعیت و آرامش بیشتر حرکت کنی.✨️ اگه دنبال اینی که روابطت شفافتر و سالمتر بشه و بتونی بدون تنش، راحتتر با آدمها ارتباط بگیری، این کتاب یه راهن…
❤3😍3
این کتاب یکی از منابع مهم تو روانشناسی ارتباطاته و بهت نشون میده که چرا بعضی وقتها حرفهامون شنیده نمیشه یا چرا بعضی گفتگوها به تنش و سوءتفاهم ختم میشن. دکتر نیما قربانی توی این کتاب هم به سبکهای مختلف ارتباطی میپردازن، مثل منفعل، پرخاشگر، منفعل - پرخاشگر و قاطعانه و هم مهارتهایی رو آموزش میدن که میتونی باهاشون ارتباطات سالمتر و مؤثرتری بسازی. #باشگاه_کتابخوانی_نگاه_فردا 📱@negah_farda
❤4👍2👏1
سومین دورهمی کتابخوانی نگاه فردا✨ 📚خوانش و گفتوگو پیرامون کتاب سبک ها و مهارت های ارتباطی، نوشته دکتر نیما قربانی ⚡️سفری به دنیای روابط؛ برای شناخت بهتر خود، درک عمیقتر دیگران و ساختن روابطی سالمتر و مؤثرتر.⚡️ 👤 تسهیلگر: خانم سارا رسولی نژاد 📌 زمان برگزاری: شنبه های مرداد ماه | ساعت 17:30 📍مکان برگزاری: مشهد . بین میدان دانشجو و فرهنگ ۳۰ . کافه کتاب تمیس 🔰جهت ثبت نام میتوانید با آیدی زیر در تمام اپلیکشن های …
😍4❤1
Posted without readable text
😍1
#باشگاه_کتابخوانی_نگاه_فردا @negah_farda
❤1😍1
#بریده_کتاب #باشگاه_کتابخوانی_نگاه_فردا @negah_farda
❤4
شاید برات عجیب باشه، ولی خیلی از مشکلاتی که توی رابطههامون تجربه میکنیم، لزوماً از کمبود علاقه یا سوءنیت نیست❗️ گاهی فقط از اینه که هیچکدوم از ما یاد نگرفتیم چطور درست باهم ارتباط برقرار کنیم، چطور ناراحتیمون رو بگیم، چطور مرز بذاریم، چطور «نه» بگیم، یا حتی چطور واقعاً به همدیگه گوش بدیم! امروز توی استوریهای نگاه فردا، درباره همین موضوع حرف زدیم؛ موضوعی که شاید بیشتر از چیزی که فکر میکنیم، روی کیفیت رابطههامو…
❤2👏1
Showing the 12 most recent of 16 posts we hold for @negah_farda. 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 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.
تا حالا شده بعد از یه گفتوگو، با خودت بگی کاش یه جور دیگه حرف میزدم ؟!
The shares total 103%, 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.
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 16 most recent posts we hold, published 21 July 2026 to 2 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.
Citation-graph rank — 271,471 of 1,481,217entries 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.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
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 5 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.
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.
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 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“باشگاه کتابخونی نگاه فردا 📚” (@negah_farda), 971 subscribers as measured 15 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/negah_farda.
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.