Channel
@nnZnn
On this record: Topic · Observations · Channels linked by matching posts · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Stars · Posts · Posts recorded as deleted · Citations · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
319,516subscribers
-19,757 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 316,228–1,000,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001381358016 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @nnZnn |
| Description | مُذكرة نادرة، أُدون عليها بخط رثّ. ستكتشف الفوضى المخبئة وأني لستُ الشاب الهادئ المبتسم بنمطية، إنني مليئ بالفوضى والمشاعر التي تتضارب. |
| Created | Between 1 April 2018 and 31 August 2021 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 10 November 2026 |
| Measurements held | 64 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 10 November 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/nnZnn |
Personal blog — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 8 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 95% confidence. This is a model’s judgement about what the channel is likely to be about, not a fact this register measured the way a subscriber count or a view count is measured — it can be revised on a later pass, and it carries no weight anywhere else on this page. How this classification works, and the other topics.
These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.
Posts published here appear in near-verbatim form on 2 other registered channels. This entry also sits inside a group of 6 channels linked by matching posts, directly or through other channels in the group; two members of the group may share no posts with each other. The matching is on the text itself, not on Telegram’s forward marker, so it finds a copy whether or not it was labelled as one.
| Posted first | Then | Overlap | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| @nnZnn/187407 · this entry21 Jan 2026, 21:24 UTC | @hffygfy/91422 Jan 2026, 18:22 UTC | 1.00 | 21 hours |
| @nnZnn/187409 · this entry29 Jan 2026, 21:00 UTC | @hffygfy/91531 Jan 2026, 18:28 UTC | 1.00 | 45 hours |
| @nnZnn/187418 · this entry23 Feb 2026, 01:03 UTC | @hffygfy/91725 Feb 2026, 16:43 UTC | 1.00 | 3 days |
| @nnZnn/187415 · this entry12 Feb 2026, 06:03 UTC | @hffygfy/9201 Mar 2026, 19:28 UTC | 1.00 | 18 days |
| @nnZnn/187435 · this entry5 Jun 2026, 21:01 UTC | @hffygfy/9232 Jul 2026, 18:13 UTC | 1.00 | 27 days |
| @nnZnn/187441 · this entry26 Jul 2026, 17:13 UTC | @yvvovv/3681030 Jul 2026, 20:28 UTC | 1.00 | 4 days |
| Channel | Matching posts | Text overlap | Typical gap | Published first |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| @hffygfy | 5 (5/5 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 3 days | this entry (5–0) |
| @yvvovv | 5 (5/5 hand-verifiable sample passed) | 1.00 | 10 days | this entry (5–0) |
Text overlap is the Jaccard coefficient over the set of distinct three-word phrases in the two bodies: 1.00 is identical wording, and the threshold for counting a pair at all is 0.70. Candidates are generated by simhash LSH (4 x 16-bit bands, exact Hamming <= 3) verified against the bodies with Jaccard over the SET of distinct 3-word shingles. Published first counts which side of each matching pair carries the earlier timestamp — in this corpus, which is the limitation directly below.
What this cannot establish
MEASURED, DOMINANT ERROR SOURCE: a post ingested before 2026-08-06 may have carried a forward header that was not recorded. A 45-pair hand-check against live t.me pages found 14 (31%) where the live page shows a forward header naming the other channel and the database has none, plus 4 more (9%) naming a third party. The text match itself was wrong 0 times out of 45. Read attribution_capture.items_in_trusted_window before treating the unattributed count as a claim.
Telegram lets a channel forward a post with a header naming the source, and we only began reliably recording that header on 2026-08-06. None of the 0 matches recorded here fall after that date, so for this entry we cannot say whether any of them carried a credit. The duplication is measured; the absence of attribution is not.
“Published first” means first in this corpus. We hold 28 comparable posts for this entry, running 3 January 2026 to 9 November 2026. A channel we have read one page deep will look younger than a neighbour we have read in full, and the order would flip with no change in the underlying facts.
The detector’s own notes on this observation, as it recorded them. Names in this_style are fields of the underlying evidence record, which the plain-English paragraphs above read out for this entry.
Of the group of 6 channels, the one whose matching posts we hold earliest is @nnZnn — which is this entry. That is a statement about our reading window, not a claim of authorship.
Recorded under the key clone_source, last confirmed 11 November 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.
This channel is in a group of 6 registered channels linked by matching posts, directly or through other channels in the group. This channel may share no posts with some of the channels listed below, and listed channels may share none with each other. Links are found by comparing text fingerprints across every channel on the register.
Which channel, if either, published first is deliberately not shown in this list. “First” could only mean first in our own crawl, which depends on how deep we happened to reach into each channel’s history, not on when the content was actually first posted. Our one hand-check read 45 of the highest-confidence flagged pairs against the live Telegram pages. In 18 of them the live page showed a “Forwarded from” credit that our database had no record of, so reading that pair as an unattributed copy was wrong; the check did not measure who published first. This list is ordered by subscriber count, the same as every other listing on this site, never by which channel we think came first. Near-verbatim matching has several ordinary explanations besides copying — a channel mirroring itself, an unattributed repost, or two channels independently repeating the same wire story — and this measurement cannot tell those apart. How this is measured.
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Nov 2026, 22:18 | 319,516 | -265 |
| 9 Nov 2026, 11:18 | 319,781 | -269 |
| 8 Nov 2026, 03:16 | 320,050 | -235 |
| 6 Nov 2026, 23:08 | 320,285 | -223 |
| 5 Nov 2026, 20:44 | 320,508 | -245 |
| 4 Nov 2026, 16:59 | 320,753 | -237 |
| 3 Nov 2026, 15:58 | 320,990 | -187 |
| 2 Nov 2026, 14:37 | 321,177 | -182 |
| 1 Nov 2026, 16:39 | 321,359 | -229 |
| 31 Oct 2026, 13:30 | 321,588 | -264 |
| 30 Oct 2026, 12:29 | 321,852 | -186 |
| 29 Oct 2026, 12:28 | 322,038 | -182 |
| 28 Oct 2026, 12:46 | 322,220 | -242 |
| 27 Oct 2026, 09:40 | 322,462 | -151 |
| 26 Oct 2026, 13:00 | 322,613 | -101 |
| 25 Oct 2026, 10:06 | 322,714 | -166 |
| 24 Oct 2026, 12:28 | 322,880 | -240 |
| 23 Oct 2026, 09:25 | 323,120 | -238 |
| 22 Oct 2026, 08:07 | 323,358 | -210 |
| 21 Oct 2026, 01:50 | 323,568 | first reading |
33 posts held, back to 3 January 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 200 pages of 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 1 of 3 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 9 November 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 33 (3 January 2026 – 9 November 2026) |
| Views total | 24,090 |
| Reactions total | 0 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 11 Nov 2026, 05:00 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 11 November 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @nnZnn. 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 33 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 3 January 2026 to 9 November 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.
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 0 of 3 posts held from the last 30 days (0%) carried it when this register last read them. The marker says a post was changed after publishing, not what it said before — this register holds the earlier wording only where an edit fell between two of its own reads (see the edit ledger and how it is measured).
يرغب في المضي قدما، لكن كثرة الاحتمالات أنهكته حتى لم يعد يعرف أي الطرق يسلك. يخشى أن يختار فيندم، وأن يتأخر فيفقد ما كان يتمناه. يريد أن يعيش بطمأنينة، لكنه لا يكف عن القلق مما قد يأتي، ويتطلع إلى أشياء كثيرة دون أن يمتلك اليقين الكافي لبلوغ أي منها. كأنه يقف في منتصف الحياة، لا هو قادر على العودة، ولا يعرف كيف يواصل الطريق. ومع ذلك، يبقى في داخله شيء صغير يرفض الاستسلام، يهمس له بأن الحيرة ليست نهاية الطريق، وأن بع…
لا يتعلم الإنسان القسوة دفعةً واحدة، بل تتسلل إليه مع كل خيبةٍ جاءت بعد ثقة، ومع كل يدٍ امتدت بحسن نية فعادت مثقلةً بالخذلان، حتى يدرك أن طيبة القلب وحدها لا تحمي صاحبها من الأذى، فيبدأ بتغيير ملامحه التي أحبها يومًا، لا لأنه أراد أن يصبح قاسيًا، بل لأن الأيام أقنعته أن بعض الناس لا يفهمون الرحمة إلا حين تغيب.
أحيانًا تكون الأيام هادئة، وأنت المضطرب.
في نهاية المطاف، يعتاد الإنسان كل شيء مهما كان حجم الأسى، يعتاد الغياب حتى وإن كان في بدايته يشبه اقتلاع شيء من روحه، ويعتاد الخيبة حتى لا يعود ينتظر من أحد شيئًا، ويعتاد الوحدة حتى يصبح الصمت رفيقًا لا يزعجه، ويعتاد الأيام الثقيلة فيمضي خلالها بوجهٍ هادئ وقلبٍ يعرف كم يخفي، ومع الوقت لا يعود يسأل لماذا حدث كل ذلك، بل كيف استطاع أن يبقى، وكيف تحوّل الألم الذي كان يخشاه إلى شيءٍ يعرف طريقه جيدًا إلى داخله، وربما أقسى …
قد يمضي الكثير، ويبقى القليل الذي هو الأرق بحد ذاته، كشوكةٍ غُرست في شغاف القلب.
نحن البؤساء: نستحق ما يحدث لنا، لقد كنا مسرفين جدًا في مشاعرنا، في طيبتنا، لم نتخذ من الحذر أي حيطة، لم نفكر بالعواقب الوخيمة التي ستحل علينا، لقد كنا نمضي قدمًا وحسب، وها نحن نقفُ هنا وحيدين لا طاقة لنا بالصراعات، تُكبلنا أصداف الخذلان، مكتئبون منعزلون نستحق ذلك وحسب.
هل ينام البؤساء؟ أم أن السهر قد فُرِضَ عليهم؟
نخفي الكثير خلف ابتسامةٍ عابرة، نبتلع خيباتنا بصمت، ونجيب عن أسئلة القلق بكلمةٍ واحدة: «لا شيء»، لا لأننا بخير، بل لأننا لا نريد أن نحمّل أحدًا ثقل ما نحمله، فنختار الصمت أحيانًا رحمةً لمن نحب، ونمضي وكأن شيئًا في داخلنا لم ينكسر.
ابحث عني إن ابتعدت، ولا تظن أن غيابي يعني أنني لم أعد أهتم. أنا أجيد الرحيل حين يثقلني كل شيء، وأميل إلى الصمت حين أعجز عن شرح ما بداخلي. أختفي بهدوء، وأترك خلفي أشياء كثيرة لم أقلها، ثم أمضي وكأن أحدًا لم يكن يعرفني من الأساس.
حين نحب أحدا، لا نراه بعين خالية من العيوب، بل بعين تتسع لقبولها. نعرف نقاط ضعفه ونلاحظ أخطاءه، ومع ذلك لا تختفي صورته الجميلة في أعيننا. فالحب لا يعني أن ترى إنسانا كاملا، بل أن ترى إنسانا كما هو، ثم تجد في قلبك سببا يجعلك تتقبل نقصه قبل كماله.
"وحدها التفاهة تُجني أرباحًا كثيرة هذه الأيام."
لأنك ترى في التفاصيل الصغيرة ما لا يراه غيرك، وتمنح الأشياء من قلبك أكثر مما تمنحك، ستجد نفسك متعبًا في كثير من الأحيان. ستتأثر بكلمة عابرة، وبموقف ينساه الآخرون سريعًا، لأنك لا تعرف كيف تمر على الأشياء دون أن تترك شيئًا منك فيها. يا صديقي، لا تكن قاسيًا على قلبك؛ فالعالم قد لا ينتبه لكل ما تشعر به، لكن حساسيتك ليست عيبًا، وما تحتاجه فقط أن تتعلم كيف تحمي قلبك دون أن تفقد طيبته.
Showing the 12 most recent of 33 posts we hold for @nnZnn. 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.
We recorded 4 posts on @nnZnn as deleted — posts this register held that were missing from the channel’s public page on two separate reads, taken from different network addresses at least an hour apart.
A deletion is not wrongdoing. This register can see that a post it held is no longer on the channel’s public page, and when — not why. Expired ad placements, reposts, rotating links and corrections all look the same. This is a count of recorded detections, not an exact total: it misses deletions we could not see, because only a post we held and later re-read inside the page can be seen to go, and it may include a small number of wrong records. How this is measured.
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.
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.
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.
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 10 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
This channel appears in 128 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 10 November 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“مذكرات مجهول” (@nnZnn), 319,516 subscribers as measured 10 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/nnZnn.
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.