Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for NinaByzantina

Channel

NinaByzantina

@ninabyzantina

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

1,535subscribers

+0 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001700835540
TypeChannel
Username@ninabyzantina
CreatedBetween 1 December 2021 and 30 April 2023— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live16 August 2026
Measurements held6
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 16 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/ninabyzantina

Growth

1,5351,5381,536.57 August 2026 — 1,535 subscribers7 August 2026 — 1,535 subscribers7 August 2026 — 1,538 subscribers10 August 2026 — 1,537 subscribers13 August 2026 — 1,538 subscribers16 August 2026 — 1,535 subscribers7 August 202616 August 2026
6 measurements spanning 9 days. 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 1,535–1,538 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
16 Aug 2026, 18:361,535-3
13 Aug 2026, 11:241,538+1
10 Aug 2026, 17:111,537-1
7 Aug 2026, 18:471,538+3
7 Aug 2026, 11:321,535no change
7 Aug 2026, 11:191,535first reading

Engagement

19 posts held, back to 2 June 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
26.0%
avg views ÷ 1,535 subscribers
Avg views / post
398
3 posts measured
Reaction rate
4.52%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
4
of 19 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 26 July 2026
Posts held19 (2 June 202626 July 2026)
Views total1,195
Reactions total54
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken7 Aug 2026, 18:08 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.

What this channel posts

Video runtime
6m 25s
Average length
2m 08s

Measured directly from 3 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.

Reaction mix

331 reactions across 18 posts, in 9 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 44.7% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍14844.7%
💯7221.8%
🤣4012.1%
309.06%
❤‍🔥154.53%
😁123.63%
🔥92.72%
😐41.21%
10.302%

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 18 of the 19 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 331reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 19 most recent posts we hold, published 2 June 2026 to 26 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.

Recent posts

26 Jul 2026, 18:58 UTC341 views16 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Why do some in the West obsess over “returning” Russia's Kaliningrad to Germany, or the Baltics, while ignoring who actually flattened it in 1944? British RAF raids destroyed the historic center of Königsberg months before Soviet forces took the city. Yet the narrative is always “evil Russia stole it.” The real story is more complicated and worth investigating. Here is my deep dive into the way Königsberg became

💯12👍4

24 Jul 2026, 10:51 UTC334 views14 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

“We had doubts [about the pre-approved Ukraine peace agreements pre-delivered by the U.S. side before the summit], but we thought about it and agreed. Not right away, but ultimately.” - Lavrov about the failure of the Anchorage process. If you strip away the diplomatic language, you can easily see that the Russian side believes that there is no one to negotiate with in good faith in the West (in the case of the EU,

💯7👍5😐2

22 Jul 2026, 20:58 UTC520 views24 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Ukraine's newly minted commander-in-chief, Mikhailo Drapaty (also known as a war criminal from the Donbass War days), kneeling in front of the then British Ambassador to Ukraine, Melinda Simmons, in 2021, as she presents him with the Queen's Sword. This shows whose interests he truly serves--one of the biggest backers of the war in Ukraine is, of course, London. @NinaByzantina

💯11👍6🔥5🤣2

13 Jul 2026, 20:45 UTC≈1,160 views16 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Video

Poland vs Ukraine. @NinaByzantina

👍12💯31

12 Jul 2026, 20:35 UTC602 views24 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Whenever a public figure dies, we get a bunch of virtue signalers advising us to not speak ill of the dead. This comes from the Graeco-Roman saying, "De mortuis nil nisi bonum," which implies that the dead cannot defend themselves, should they be criticized. But this is not the only famous saying about the dead. Voltaire, for instance, wrote "On doit des égards aux vivants; on ne doit aux morts que la vérité," that

👍17🔥32💯2

10 Jul 2026, 20:24 UTC≈2,360 views9 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

While 🇺🇦 Ukraine's ̶t̶o̶p̶ ̶t̶e̶r̶r̶o̶r̶i̶s̶t̶ Budanov called Ukrainians "God's chosen people" (don't worry, Israel, he added, "among the Slavs"), Ukrainian authorities are also seeking to use the Orthodox Kiev-Pechersk Lavra monastery as a burial site for Ukraine's "national heroes." Not even the officially atheist Bolsheviks buried their heroes on the territory of the Lavra. Who comprises Ukraine's current natio

💯7👍1🤣1

8 Jul 2026, 20:12 UTC454 views24 reactionsread 7 August 2026

Everyone is marvelling about the next insane aid package that NATO (the Europeans and Canada) pledged for Ukraine over the next two years. The total, €140 billion, is indeed massive. But funding and results are two very different things. First, Western countries have already given Ukraine somewhere between $350-$450 billion since 2022 without any significant tangible results (tactical strikes against Russia’s energy

💯19👍32

3 Jul 2026, 20:45 UTC≈1,030 views17 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

A few decades ago, this hyperbolic, pompous speech targeting a Russian children’s cartoon would’ve been a subject of Monty Python’s vicious comedic mockery. Today, John Cleese is an insufferable Russophobe pontificating on social media, and this ridiculous parliamentary spectacle, in a country with far more pressing problems ranging from the economy to migration, is taken seriously. Even that once-famous British humo

👍10🤣7

3 Jul 2026, 20:42 UTC899 views7 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Wow, Russian bots are out in full force today! Oh wait, it’s actually multiple Western media outlets acknowledging the fact that Ukraine has a systemic torture problem in its army (and that’s beyond kidnapping the remaining men off the streets, I guess). And since Western media almost never does such things out of sincerity or actual journalism, you have to wonder about the purpose of such an admission. @NinaByzan

👍7

1 Jul 2026, 12:28 UTC532 views12 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Yet another specimen who could’ve stayed home playing Call of Duty, but chose to play a stupid game and win a stupid prize in Ukraine instead. Was it worth it? 🤷🏻‍♀️ @NinaByzantina

👍12

1 Jul 2026, 02:52 UTC470 views14 reactionsread 7 August 2026
Photo

Look at these Ukrainians’ ages and physical features. No doubt they were captured and kidnapped off the streets to fight for the interests represented by Ursula von der Leyen, Black Rock, and Zelensky’s personal pockets. And this is just depressing! Here is the original https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0nBdoXSVmqF2TyN5Qc58xifecxEH4i2MaWxmAb1fnM9b2eTn6aspDiWhvSEquCAZ9l&id=100083325527221&rdid=t7

❤‍🔥6👍5😐21

Showing the 12 most recent of 19 posts we hold for @ninabyzantina. 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

Citation-graph rank — 553,207 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.

Forward network

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

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.

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.

“NinaByzantina” (@ninabyzantina), 1,535 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ninabyzantina.

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.