Какая обложка лучше?
- 1 - digital art, неоновое освещение57%
- 2 - типа как Гойя25%
- не знаю18%
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
custom 52831870182374849684

Channel
@neurofikwriterka
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry
200subscribers
-1 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002445366495 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @neurofikwriterka |
| Description | «Писать с помощью ИИ на самом деле очень легко. Ты просто садишься перед чатом ГПТ и начинаешь истекать кровью» По всем вопросам: @geraltzdupy Мой фикбук: https://ficbook.net/authors/01934f0d-ffcf-7f01-a21f-ac6a9cc814a7 |
| Created | Between 1 September 2024 and 31 March 2025— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 8 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 15 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 3 |
| On Telegram | t.me/neurofikwriterka |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 8 Aug 2026, 11:32 | 200 | no change |
| 8 Aug 2026, 09:10 | 200 | -1 |
| 7 Aug 2026, 17:29 | 201 | first reading |
17 posts held, back to 30 May 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 17 (30 May 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 450 |
| Reactions total | 86 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 11:32 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.
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 8 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.
Measured directly from 1 video 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.
281 reactions across 15 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 26.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| custom 6327578929817192652 | 75 | 26.7% | |
| ❤ | 70 | 24.9% | |
| 🔥 | 31 | 11.0% | |
| custom 5283187018237484968 | 27 | 9.61% | |
| custom 5294240219652963125 | 27 | 9.61% | |
| custom 5334869231588619276 | 20 | 7.12% | |
| custom 5294277710422486087 | 11 | 3.91% | |
| custom 5291759042815864512 | 8 | 2.85% | |
| custom 5296662396524309469 | 8 | 2.85% | |
| custom 5294344432739431791 | 4 | 1.42% |
Custom emoji. 8 of the rows above are 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 counts beside them areTelegram’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 15 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 281reactions 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 30 May 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.
Какая обложка лучше?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
custom 52831870182374849684
Нужен совет. На какую обложку вы бы скорее кликнули в промо? Тематика работы: оридж, слэш, средневековое фэнтэзи, планируется макси. Сейчас создам опрос.
custom 52831870182374849687🔥6
Channel photo updated
Вот моя собственная визуализация Тани. Но это я и нейронка рисовала. А Элллль нарисовала! сама!!!!!! И она по-другому её видит. я просто в восторге диком. По сюжету у героини такая внешность, что она вызывает ассоциации с русалками. И Элллль так точно это передала! А я не смогла так со своей нейронкой. Через полчаса мы уже сидели на моей веранде, пили колу со льдом и ели беларусское печенье. Таня была снова укутана…
🔥10❤6custom 52831870182374849685
Нейрофикрайтерка pinned a photo
Добавила в реакции обычный огонь 🔥 и гачи с бутылкой 🍺 А то как-то было мало реакций, символизирующих красоту.
custom 52831870182374849687🔥5❤1
О господи, это невероятно! Прекрасная Элллль нарисовала фан-арт на мою работу «Эквинокс»!!!!! Это Таня, второстепенная оригинальная героиня. Это первый фан-арт в моей жизни на мою работу. На оригинальную героиню, созданную мной 🤩 Просто ВААААААААУ 😍 И она прекрасна! Я восхитилась её бёдрами ещё до того, как поняла, КОГО Элллль рисует. Не поняла сразу потому что, блин, как вообще в такое можно поверить 😱 Очень по…
🔥10❤5custom 52831870182374849684
Режиссер «Района №9» и «Элизиума» Нил Бломкамп снял и опубликовал короткометражный фильм Nightborne полностью сделанный при помощи ИИ. Теперь на него нападают в соцсетях и обвиняют в предательстве «настоящего кинематографа». Фильм можно посмотреть на ютубе. Там можно включить русские автосгенерированные субтитры. Я проверила, качество перевода хорошее. Смотрите с осторожностью, сюжет интенсивный и неприятный. Мне оч…
❤8custom 52942402196529631254custom 63275789298171926524
В последнее время у ИИ-хейтеров появился новый жанр: "я специально написала фанфик с ИИ, чтобы показать, как плохо ИИ пишет фанфики". Чувиха, ты показала только то, что ты не умеешь обращаться с этим современным инструментом. И тебя не устроил собственный результат. А тот факт, что по очень краткому и непродуманному промту нейронка выдала что-то осмысленное и похожее на завершенный фанфик - это следствие того, что…
❤16custom 52917590428158645128custom 52942402196529631255custom 63275789298171926523custom 52942777104224860871custom 52943444327394317911custom 53348692315886192761
Придумала идею, посмеялась, а потом взяла и написала фанфик. Обложку пока не одобрили (да, она будет именно такая. Именно такой коллаж. Интересно, одобрят ли. Могут придраться к авторским правам на баннер с собственного сайта). Предыдущий пост с канала удалила, ибо там спойлер сюжета. Скачать текст работы можно в комментариях под постом ⬇️⬇️⬇️
custom 52942402196529631259❤7custom 63275789298171926525
Видели новый конкурс от Фикбука? Ссылка на условия. Если вкратце, то они всего лишь просят написать истории по заданным тропам, похожим на сюжеты "Черного Зеркала". Не удивлюсь, если этот набор тропов был сгенерирован ИИшкой (и не осуждаю). Одним из условий, как и в предыдущих конкурсах фикбука, является запрет на генерацию текста с ИИ. На всякий случай напомню, что ни один детектор не даёт 100% гарантии. Если автор …
❤13custom 52943444327394317913
Вчера было Солнцестояние, и в честь этого хочется напомнить о существовании моей работы «Эквинокс». Для этого воспользуюсь бинго-табличкой от сообщества ID0151. Мало кто читал «Эквинокс», а тем временем, это мой единственный завершённый макси, и стекла я там навалила будь здоров, всё по лучшим лекалам. Если что, не злые трагичные злодеи, смерть родителей и амнезия не мои, они из канона, но в фанфике они драматично ра…
custom 632757892981719265210custom 53348692315886192765❤3custom 52942777104224860872
Showing the 12 most recent of 17 posts we hold for @neurofikwriterka. 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.
Какая обложка лучше?
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 30 May 2026 to 7 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 — 990,478 of 1,548,671entries 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.
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 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.
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 8 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Нейрофикрайтерка” (@neurofikwriterka), 200 subscribers as measured 8 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/neurofikwriterka.
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.