Channel
@o_thg
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Stars · Advertising · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
3,505subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001290744021 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @o_thg |
| Created | 12 April 2019 — measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel) |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/o_thg |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 10:54 | 3,505 | -3 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 10:31 | 3,508 | +2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 18:00 | 3,506 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 05:46 | 3,505 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 05:38 | 3,505 | first reading |
28 posts held, back to 2 August 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 3 pagesof 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 | 28 (2 August 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 20,406 |
| Reactions total | 600 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 23:11 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.
434 reactions across 22 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 73.7% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 320 | 73.7% | |
| 🕊 | 68 | 15.7% | |
| 😢 | 30 | 6.91% | |
| 🤔 | 13 | 3.00% | |
| 👀 | 2 | 0.461% | |
| 👌 | 1 | 0.23% |
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 28 of the 28 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 600reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 28 most recent posts we hold, published 2 August 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.
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @o_thg. 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 28 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 2 August 2026 to 7 August 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.
An ad marker, not a judgement about a post. A post is counted here because it carries one of two explicit markings: an erid token, which Russian law has required on paid placements since 2022 and which is issued against a specific advertising contract, or a #реклама / #ad hashtag in the body, which is the channel declaring it itself. The first is documentary; the second is a self-declaration and is weaker. No classifier reads the text and decides — nothing on this site guesses that a post is an advertisement.
This is a floor, and it can only ever be a floor.A channel that runs paid placements without marking them produces no marker for us to count, and an unmarked ad is indistinguishable from an ordinary post on the public surface. The ad load above therefore means “the share of posts that declared themselves”, never “the share of posts that were paid for”. A low figure is not evidence of a channel that runs few ads.
Both figures are medians, and no ratio between them is published. Each is a view reading that actually occurred on a post, picked by percentile_disc rather than averaged, so one viral post cannot move it and no interpolated value is invented between two readings. The sample on one side is under five posts, which is too thin to compare. The two figures are shown side by side with the count behind each, and deliberately not divided into a headline like “ads get x% fewer views” — an arithmetic that is easy to print and, at this sample size, means nothing.
| erid | Posts | First seen | Last seen |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2W5zFJoH89w | 1 | 4 August 2026 | 4 August 2026 |
A token repeated across several posts is one advertising contract placed more than once, which is what the identifier is for. The strings are reproduced exactly as they appeared in the post or in its click-through URL and are not validated against any registry — we record the marker a channel published, and whether it resolves to a real contract is a question for the register that issued it.
Measured over the 28 most recent posts we hold, published 2 August 2026 to 7 August 2026. Views are the latest single reading held for each post, and any reading at or above 1,000 is rounded by Telegram to three significant figures.
РАЗВЕ В НАУКЕ НЕ СУЩЕСТВУЕТ СВОИХ ПРОБЛЕМ? Разве в науке нет ошибок и споров? – Все так! В науке есть и мифы, и даже свои дураки с красными дипломами! Но вопрос не в том, насколько более-менее оформившаяся сегодня научная картина мира верна, а в том, что «предыдущие версии» мировоззрения, представлений о мире в мифе и в античной метафизике неверны! Еще раз это подчеркнем: Проблема не в том, что в научной картине мира…
👍1
«Конечно, многие христиане будут догматически настаивать, что слово получило свое полное и окончательное выражение в Библии. Но мы должны сразу же заметить, что это заявление – поскольку оно ограничивает откровение прошлым или первоначальным временем – …не принимает полностью христианское значение грехопадения. Оно ищет непорочную форму слова, чистый момент откровения в его первозданном и вечном смысле, незамутненный…
👍15
«Разумеется, что такой Христос, который является просто Богом, не уникален для христианства, поскольку он не обнаруживает признаков конкретного сошествия Бога в человеческую плоть. Это сошествие не может быть вполне понятым, если только оно не понимается как реальное изменение самого Бога; причем происходит это изменение окончательно и бесповоротно везде, где есть история и жизнь. Пока христианский Бог продолжает пон…
👍3😢1
Илья Гриц и пророчества. Разбор книги прор. Аввакума. Искупление в иудейкой теологии https://youtu.be/oAqGaSF76bI?si=Wq5wCse4kuoeyXlP (ЮТУБ) #библеистика
👍14👀1
Лиза, милая! Милостей тебе Господа и сил :)) зато теперь вы понимаете меня :))) Ну, я про свое отношение к биомассам в инернете, к этим всем, кого именую идиотами и быдлом. "как в говно ступила". Эт точно https://t.me/konofalsh/448 #цивилизация #личное
🕊6👍3
⚡️ ВИДЕО: https://rutube.ru/video/f5574f252666460374cb0e3dbd4c3fbc/ (рутуб) Илья Гриц и пророчества. Разбор книги прор. Аввакума. Искупление в иудейкой теологии #библеистика
👍15
Стиралка кирдык... Оказывается, мастеров в округе нет (нет и всё!). У меня корейская – Самсунг. Напомню, то воды у меня на участке нет – поэтому привезенную в бидонах я просто ковшом заливал в сектор для порошка. Сегодня заложил стирку, засыпал порошок, начал заливать, а она трещит. Снял фильтр, почистил – все равно трещит, вроде как моторчик. И потом загорается сообщение об ошибке. Что делать? Искать мастера в Воро…
😢27👍4🤔1
ПРИШЕЛ И ТАКОЙ ВОТ КОММЕНТАРИЙ ЧИТАТЕЛЯ А я сразу вспомнил слова великого апостола Павла: «Ибо перед Богом мы и есть аромат Христа, доступный обонянию как спасаемых, так и погибающих. И для одних мы запах смерти, который умерщвляет, а для других мы запах жизни, который оживляет. И кто еще способен на такое?» (2Кор 2:15-16) #личное
👍37🕊5
Феномен библейского (царского) мессианизма В Писании (особ. в текстах эпохи Первого Храма, т.е. в текстах эпохи Иудейского Царства) мы встречаем многочисленные «высокие» эпитеты о «мессии» из дома Давида – так именовался династический царь Иудеи. Достаточно прочесть Псалмы 2, 71, 109, 88, 44, чтобы убедиться, что царская власть воспринималась как божественное начало в народе. Именно этот земной царь именовался Мессие…
👍19🕊5
Почему в сюжете с Аэндорской волшебницей (1Цар 26:7-25) именно «дух Самуила» оказывается носителем знания о будущем? Такой вопрос я получил от одного из подписчиков: не означает ли это, что будущее существует и т.д.? На самом деле этот сюжет нужно рассматривать очень внимательно в целом, т.е. весь сюжет, а не его кусок. Во-первых, поводом обращения Саула были глубокие сомнения. Армия Израиля уже несла большие потери,…
👍12👀1🕊1🤔1
Никола Минюхин. Анатомия догмы // Записки Нижегородского религиоведа // https://vk.ru/wall-181155295_230 (05.08.2026) Рекомендую статью по ссылке! Кстати, очень верно подмечено, что в основе всех решений в СССР был «догматизм» (что подтверждает мой тезис «коммунизм – это религия») – такой же упрямый и фанатичный, как у тупых традиционалистов у нас, в христианстве. Везде в мире научные исследования уже были свободны…
👍11🤔1
Начало 👆 5. Ключевая идея автора в том, что Бог «прежний» после воплощения полностью перестал существовать. Исходным постулатом является принятие аксиомы о том, что изначально Бог был «полностью трансцендентным». Я же считаю, что Бог никогда не был абсолютом и совершенно трансцендентным. Уже породив Логос вовне Себя как «другого Бога», Отец о-предéлился Логосом! И на протяжении всех миллиардов лет существования внепо…
👍5😢1
Showing the 12 most recent of 28 posts we hold for @o_thg. 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 — 33,333 of 1,160,990entries 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 9 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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“"Отверженный строителями камень..." с "проклятием Кассандры" на плечах (o.thg)” (@o_thg), 3,505 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/o_thg.
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.