Education — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-FP8, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 10 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 98% 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.
Growth
59 measurements spanning 93 days, net -612. 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 22,484–23,280 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 59
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
7 Nov 2026, 00:06
22,576
-7
5 Nov 2026, 22:57
22,583
-8
5 Nov 2026, 01:11
22,591
-9
4 Nov 2026, 03:54
22,600
-12
3 Nov 2026, 04:47
22,612
-7
2 Nov 2026, 05:37
22,619
-4
1 Nov 2026, 02:09
22,623
-1
31 Oct 2026, 00:28
22,624
-10
29 Oct 2026, 22:09
22,634
-12
28 Oct 2026, 23:35
22,646
-5
27 Oct 2026, 22:45
22,651
-6
26 Oct 2026, 18:57
22,657
-12
25 Oct 2026, 17:16
22,669
-4
23 Oct 2026, 20:27
22,673
-8
22 Oct 2026, 21:30
22,681
-4
21 Oct 2026, 16:39
22,685
-17
20 Oct 2026, 11:06
22,702
-13
19 Oct 2026, 13:38
22,715
-12
18 Oct 2026, 14:56
22,727
+8
17 Oct 2026, 17:51
22,719
first reading
Engagement
49 posts held, back to 6 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 97 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
11.2%
avg views ÷ 22,576 subscribers
Avg views / post
2,530
13 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.40%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
13
of 49 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
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 5 November 2026
Posts held
49 (6 July 2026 – 5 November 2026)
Views total
32,940
Reactions total
462
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
7 Nov 2026, 02:40 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
Photos
370
Videos
13
Links
608
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 7 November 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.
Reaction mix
2,005 reactions across 47 posts, in 14 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 44.8% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
899
44.8%
🔥
499
24.9%
👍
442
22.0%
❤🔥
40
2.00%
👎
33
1.65%
💯
26
1.30%
😁
26
1.30%
🥰
18
0.898%
🤔
12
0.599%
👌
3
0.15%
😍
2
0.1%
🤩
2
0.1%
🦄
2
0.1%
🤯
1
0.05%
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 49 of the 49 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 2,101 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 49 most recent posts we hold, published 6 July 2026 to 5 November 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
4
across the posts below
Posts paid on
3
of 49 we hold a reading for · 6%
Most on one post
2
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @no_shame_facilitation. 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 49 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 6 July 2026 to 5 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.
Recent posts
Telegram’s own ‘edited’ marker: 4 of 13 posts held from the last 30 days (30.8%) 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).
Секрет хорошего брейншторма: тишина 🤫
👀 Как люди представляют себе мозговой штурм:
Задаётся вопрос, и люди в комнате начинают фонтанировать идеями, накидывать варианты и докручивать идеи друг друга: «а если ещё вот так». Энергия, креатив, успех!
❗️Наш опыт и исследования говорят о том, мозговой штурм вслух — один из самых неэффективных способов мозгового штурма.
Исследователи из Wharton и INSEAD в 2010 году срав…
🚚🚛Переезд из Miro в Holst без потери нервных клеток
В связи с ограничениями Miro в России мы решили позаботиться о наших российских клиентах — перевезли часть тренинговых материалов в Holst и уже провели в нем первый корпоративный тренинг по фасилитации.
Переезд оказался немного проще, чем мы думали! С теми, кто сейчас ищет альтернативу Miro, своим опытом делится наш замечательный тренер Саша Нефедова:
1️⃣ Доски…
🕵️♀️ Ретроспективим проект, чтобы следующий был лучше
Мы в Co-Actors проводим много проектов: мастерэфиры, вебинары и митапы для HR и T&D и т. п. И вот очередной проект закончился, все выдохнули и побежали дальше... Но насколько он был полезен? Не зря ли мы старались? Что стоит изменить в следующий раз?
Чтобы не наступать на те же грабли, мы используем вот такой лёгкий формат ретро и делимся им с вами.
1. Смотр…
🔥Что может группа из 200 человек 🔥
Привет, команда Co-Actors! Мы задумали сделать выезд для 200 наших лидеров в Белград. Хотим сделать ретроспективу года, выбрать направления на следующий год и научить менеджеров проводить эффективные встречи! Сможете?
Мы-то сможем! Но вот на что способна и НЕ способна группа из 200 человек:
✅ Способна:
Послушать информацию и синхронизироваться — презентации про стратегию и буд…
🥘🍷💃Можно ли тусить с заказчиками?
Представим типичную стратсессию — участники приехали из разных офисов в одну локацию, сто лет друг друга не видели, ажиотаж максимум. Впереди 3 дня сессии, совместные обеды, ужины, посиделки в баре по вечерам. Триатлонист Дима спрашивает, не хочет ли кто-нибудь пробежаться по пирсу утром. Света предлагает организовать вечернюю йогу-растяжку. А HR пишет всем напоминание, что 3 дня …
«Позвали на 15 минут, а обсуждение растянулось на 2 часа». Знакомо? 🙃
28 октября Арина Жигулёва проведёт воркшоп «Фасилитация спонтанных встреч и решений», для всех, кто ведёт встречи, даже если не называет себя фасилитатором. Этот воркшоп подойдет тимлидам, продактам, руководителям, HR, и начинающим фасилитаторам.
📌️️️️️️ Что вы получите:
• Структуру для любой встречи на базе метода ОРИП
• Практический навык фасил…
Как "на берегу" упростить будущие согласования проекта
Болтала на днях с коллегой — проектным менеджером в HR. На вопрос «Как дела?» она ответила:
«Арина, я жук-невывожук 😩 Веду три проекта, и по каждому одно и то же: бизнес-заказчиков раз за разом приходится убеждать, что проект действительно нужен компании! Топчемся на месте, когда пора согласовывать реализацию!»
Если вы узнали в этом стоне души свои будни, попр…
Как понять, что встреча была ценной?
Я постоянно слышу жалобы на качество встреч:
– опять забили мне весь календарь своими синками ...
– мы снова бестолково поговорили и разошлись ...
– третий раз эту тему мусолим ...
– боюсь, что мы опять соберемся и ни к чему не придем ...
Но сами обсуждения не проблема, это нормальная часть работы. Вопрос в том, к чему каждая встреча приводит.
Предлагаю оценивать встречи по рез…
👀 Как работают руководители разработки в 2026? 👀
Наши друзья из DevCrowd уже несколько лет проводят независимое исследование руководителей разработки, тимлидов и CTO.
Вот, например, результаты исследования 2025 года.
Мы знаем, что в нашем канале много IT-руководителей, и предлагаем вам найти 10–15 минут, чтобы внести свой вклад в хорошее дело и в развитие профессии 😊
❓ О чём исследование 2026 года:
Сколько платя…
🤷♀️Если группа не может принять решение 🤷♂️
На последней стратсессии мы с группой попали в тупик.
Мы обсуждали решение, и были участники, которые с ним согласны:
👍 «Надо пробовать! Это нам поможет!»
А были те, кто нет:
👎 «А я думаю наоборот, это слишком большое изменение! Вдруг что-то поломается, а сейчас работает нормально».
⌚Перестрелка мнениями и примерами ни к чему не приводила, а воздух в комнате то накал…
😳 "А надо было готовиться?" Что написать группе до и после встречи 📨
— А ты кто? А почему мы должны это делать?
— Мы что, ради ЭТОГО собрались?
— Что надо было принести? Ну, я не в курсе.
— Я с телефона, ребята, не смогу работать на доске.
На наших тренингах мы учим, что 80% успеха встречи — это подготовка к ней. Но готовиться должен не только ведущий. Важно заранее вовлекать в подготовку участников, информировать …
Друзья, у нас новость 🎉
Этой осенью Co-Actors получили новую аккредитацию от ICA (International Certification Alliance). Поэтому мы запускаем серию новых воркшопов.
Темы воркшопов прекрасно дополняют наш основной тренинг по фасилитации, и не повторяют его программу 🫶
1️⃣ Фасилитация спонтанных встреч и решений · 28 октября
Для тех, кто часто уходит со встречи без решения или договаривается, а потом никто ничего не…
❤17🔥13👍5
Showing the 12 most recent of 49 posts we hold for @no_shame_facilitation. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@no_shame_facilitation edited 2 posts after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
3 October 2026
Most recent edit
3 November 2026
Polls
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.
The shares total 373%, 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 49 most recent posts we hold, published 6 July 2026 to 5 November 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.
Forward network
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.
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.
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.
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
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 19 September 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.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
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.
Максим Дорофеев: Прокрастинация и джедайские техники @mnogosdelal · 25,881 Telegram ranks this channel #29 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 14 September 2026
Цифровой этикет @digitaletiquette · 24,314 Telegram ranks this channel #36 of 99 here — alongside 98 others — read 16 September 2026
Живое обучение @prolearning · 20,622 Telegram ranks this channel #42 of 100 here — alongside 99 others — read 26 September 2026
REFORUM @reforum · 18,743 Telegram ranks this channel #63 of 100 here — alongside 99 others — read 5 October 2026
Менеджер от боженьки @pm_god · 25,048 Telegram ranks this channel #65 of 98 here — alongside 97 others — read 14 September 2026
pmclub — учим управлять @pmclub · 20,714 Telegram ranks this channel #71 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 26 September 2026
Филипп Гузенюк I Счастье в деятельности @guzenuk · 22,037 Telegram ranks this channel #71 of 99 here — alongside 98 others — read 21 September 2026
FEDOR BORSHEV @pmdaily · 23,640 Telegram ranks this channel #73 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 17 September 2026
AgileFluent: карьера без границ @agilefluent · 48,636 Telegram ranks this channel #75 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 28 August 2026
Теории и Практики @tandp_ru · 22,017 Telegram ranks this channel #78 of 100 here — alongside 99 others — read 21 September 2026
СберУниверситет @sber_university · 24,310 Telegram ranks this channel #80 of 100 here — alongside 99 others — read 17 September 2026
🔥 Дмитрий Ирешев: AI • Продукты • Проекты @dmitrii_ireshev_Agile_PMP · 35,203 Telegram ranks this channel #81 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 12 September 2026
Нормально делай, нормально будет / Саша Клименко @normalno_delaj · 21,495 Telegram ranks this channel #83 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 22 September 2026
Teamlead Good Reads – ежедневные советы про менеджмент людей и команд @leadgr · 30,058 Telegram ranks this channel #84 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 10 September 2026
Про Проекты и карьеру в ИТ | Романова @proProject1 · 40,019 Telegram ranks this channel #97 of 97 here — alongside 96 others — read 1 September 2026
This channel appears in 15 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 7 November 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Нестыдная фасилитация” (@no_shame_facilitation), 22,576 subscribers as measured 7 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/no_shame_facilitation.
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.