Other / unclassifiable — 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 54% 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.
Observations
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.
Views per post sit far above this size band
140,000 average views per post against 182,869 subscribers — an engagement rate of 76.6%. Across the 7,043 registered channels in the same cohort — 100,014–316,163 subscribers — the middle half sit between 1.90% and 13.4%, with a median of 5.52%.
What this was computed from
Window
30 days (30 August 2026 – 29 September 2026)
Posts measured
39 of 39 published in the window (0 exact, 39 rounded by Telegram)
Views totalled
5,460,000
Mature posts only
78.3% over 38 posts read at least 24h after publication
When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.
This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal. A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.
Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 29 September 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.
Growth
35 measurements spanning 51 days, net -3,282. 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 182,377–186,643 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 35
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
26 Sept 2026, 11:40
182,869
-456
19 Sept 2026, 14:01
183,325
-194
17 Sept 2026, 04:58
183,519
-148
15 Sept 2026, 05:37
183,667
-158
13 Sept 2026, 11:15
183,825
-60
11 Sept 2026, 15:22
183,885
-200
8 Sept 2026, 22:01
184,085
-237
5 Sept 2026, 12:57
184,322
-133
3 Sept 2026, 13:55
184,455
-119
2 Sept 2026, 04:06
184,574
-87
1 Sept 2026, 03:15
184,661
-65
31 Aug 2026, 00:15
184,726
-54
29 Aug 2026, 21:46
184,780
-74
28 Aug 2026, 22:15
184,854
-13
27 Aug 2026, 23:23
184,867
-34
27 Aug 2026, 02:01
184,901
-11
26 Aug 2026, 01:33
184,912
-54
25 Aug 2026, 01:43
184,966
-60
23 Aug 2026, 14:55
185,026
-61
22 Aug 2026, 01:43
185,087
first reading
Engagement
91 posts held, back to 21 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 114 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
76.6%
avg views ÷ 182,869 subscribers
Avg views / post
140,000
39 posts measured
Reaction rate
3.04%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
39
of 91 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 29 September 2026
Posts held
91 (21 July 2026 – 29 September 2026)
Views total
5,460,000
Reactions total
165,961
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
29 Sept 2026, 20:44 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
≈1,310
Videos
≈729
Links
≈5,230
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 29 September 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.
Video runtime
1m 02s
Average length
21s
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
445,627 reactions across 91 posts, in 57 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 30.4% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
💯
135,545
30.4%
❤
88,320
19.8%
🙏
62,402
14.0%
🤣
28,836
6.47%
👍
27,542
6.18%
😢
21,822
4.90%
🔥
21,354
4.79%
🤬
20,729
4.65%
😁
14,388
3.23%
🫡
8,594
1.93%
🤔
3,910
0.877%
😭
3,144
0.706%
💊
1,876
0.421%
custom 5314614887375192869
1,671
0.375%
👀
1,136
0.255%
💔
1,050
0.236%
🤯
492
0.11%
😡
437
0.098%
🤷♂
424
0.095%
❤🔥
300
0.067%
37 further kinds
1,655
0.371%
Custom emoji. One row above is a 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 count beside it is Telegram’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 91 of the 91 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 445,627 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 91 most recent posts we hold, published 21 July 2026 to 29 September 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
266
across the posts below
Posts paid on
52
of 91 we hold a reading for · 57%
Most on one post
61
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @officer_33. 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 91 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 21 July 2026 to 29 September 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.
Історія про реактивні перехоплювачі буде лише масштабовуватись в СОУ і кількість виробників, котрі беруться за цей проєкт, все більше і більше з кожним днем, тому приблизно через 2 місяці збиті реактивні шахеди дронами-перехоплювачами за копієчну вартість - перестануть бути чимось новим та нереальним, ринок поступово почнуть насичувати даними засобами і доволі різноплановими.
Шкода лише, що задумались над цим занадт…
В умовах кілл-зон та загалом тотального контролю по 15-20 км від ЛБЗ в кожній зі сторін, варто приділяти величезну увагу логістичному забезпеченню підрозділів та позицій, що, на жаль, досі не здійснюється належним чином.
Якщо навіть ті ж самі НРК хоч якось видаються, більш менш регулярно, на підрозділи, та і сама по собі тема досі залишається популярною і не занадто дорогою, то з забезпеченням належного транспортног…
Сьогодні на Добропільському напрямку противник лише безповоротно втратив 150 одиниць живої сили(зафіксовано кожне), концентруючи свої зусилля на спробах прориву до міста. Це лише вбитими і лише на 40 км ЛБЗ.
Кількість задіяних підрозділів, і відповідно втрат, просто зашкалює і здається не має меж перед амбіціями підар-генералів.
Офіцер ✙ | Підписатись
Темпи утилізації противника, традиційно, під осінь починають зростати)
Літня кампанія дала одну велику перевагу противнику - густу зеленку, яка чудово маскує групи, що намагаються інфільтруватись в наш тил, чи просто дає можливість сховатись від БпЛА будь-якого типу.
Наразі сезон поступово починає змінюватись і відповідно з кожним тижнем у підар-піхоти все менше і менше шансів на притомне маскування, тому якщо темп…
Бронетехніка відходить з тренду цієї війни…
В реаліях війни 2026-го року застосування бронетехніки будь-якого типу відійшла на другий план, адже перенасиченість поля бою БпЛА створює максимально несприятливі умови для її існування; якщо в 2023-2024 роках всі робили ставку на Бредлі та Абрамси, то зараз ця історія майже неактуальна, на відміну від ББМ, які відіграють ключову роль в логістичному забезпеченні позицій (…
Ситуація в Добропіллі досить складна, противник активно намагається інфільтруватись безпосередньо до міста, там в принципі і знаходять свою останню домівку))
Розуміючи, що в глибоку зиму вони навряд здобудуть вагомих успіхів на напрямку - противник намагається за осінь максимально зменшити кількість свого п..здежа в доповідях, відносно дійсності.
Офіцер ✙ | Підписатись
Противник намагається нарощувати удари далекобійними FPV-дронами по місту Суми, з сугубо терористичною метою - посіяти паніку, паралізувати нормальне життя місцевих мешканців.
Кількість ударів за останні тижні значно збільшилася і у військовому плані це не дає і не може дати особливих переваг, а більше орієнтовано на залякування населення і відповідно знекровлення міста.
Про масштабні пагубні наслідки поки ще рано …
«Є два варіанти закінчення війни. Один дуже поганий, інший такий, який може підняти країни до величі» - Трамп.
100%, скажи ще, що від такої кінцівки всі будуть переможцями і вийдуть лише в плюс… да, да, да, саме так все і буде.
Абсолютна протилежність сторін, їх позицій та інтересів говорить лише про те, що неможливе ніяке перемир’я, ні постійне, ні тимчасове; будь-які спроби примирення будуть невдалими або фактичн…
4 роки мобілізації путіна.
4 роки як режим путіна оголосив часткову мобілізацію в рф, 4 роки як в рф почала закінчуватись професійно армія і в бій пішли рандомні йоблики, яких діставали з усіх закутків або вони самі йшли на хвилі неадекватного маразму-патріотизму.
Пройшло 4 роки після вжитих заходів по поповненню мʼяса і проблема з дефіцитом особового складу все одно наздогнала противника, адже темпи утилізації є з…
Противник публікує рекламні відео супутникової мережі «Рассвет», основна концепція таки є, вона працює, вони її намагаються розвивати, адже фактично єдине, що стримує - кількість супутників, виведених на орбіту і можливість там працювати в штатному режимі.
SpaceX вивела на орбіту тисячі супутників, в той час як підари близько декількох десятків, для досягнення мінімально прийнятних результатів потрібно декілька соте…
Showing the 12 most recent of 91 posts we hold for @officer_33. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@officer_33 edited 1 post 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
9 August 2026
Most recent edit
9 August 2026
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 29 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. The 24 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
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 14 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.
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.
Розвідник ✙ @rozvidnuk_1 · 51,528 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 83 here — alongside 82 others — read 25 August 2026
Думки Фронтовика ∆ @dumky_frontovyka · 55,044 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 23 August 2026
PEKHNO🇺🇦 @pekhno_news · 68,199 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 20 August 2026
In Factum @in_factum · 45,083 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 28 August 2026
Позивний Каппа @KappaHimera · 52,149 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 24 August 2026
Око Гора ✙ Новости и аналитика @oko_gora · 67,839 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 84 here — alongside 83 others — read 21 August 2026
47 окрема механізована бригада «Маґура» @brygada47 · 52,319 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 25 August 2026
Zvиздец Мангусту @zvizdecmanhustu · 68,310 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 20 August 2026
Sazonov / Official @Kirilovolodimirovich · 106,355 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 15 August 2026
Жорін /// Третій армійський корпус @MaksymZhorin · 120,584 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 15 August 2026
Розвідка Ноєм @rozvidka_noem · 112,116 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 14 August 2026
WarArchive @WarArchive_ua · 50,841 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 25 August 2026
🐻Балу HUB🐻 @BaluHUB777 · 55,014 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 79 here — alongside 78 others — read 23 August 2026
Євген Карась ✙ @karas_evgen · 163,514 Telegram ranks this channel #4 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 14 August 2026
✙Resurgam✙ @resurgammmm · 55,369 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 87 here — alongside 86 others — read 23 August 2026
UKRAINIAN MILITANT @ukrainian_militant · 63,738 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 21 August 2026
Піхотинець Хижак🦅🇺🇦 @lost_generation_88 · 64,227 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 21 August 2026
КіберБорошно | CyberBoroshno @kiber_boroshno · 67,746 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 21 August 2026
Aeris Rimor @AerisRimor · 163,758 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 14 August 2026
Міністерство оборони України @ministry_of_defense_ua · 66,164 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 94 here — alongside 93 others — read 21 August 2026
KRAKEN | ПБС 3 Армійського Корпусу @kraken_ab3 · 71,543 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 82 here — alongside 81 others — read 19 August 2026
Американський 🚀 піхотинець @usinfantryman1 · 91,638 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 86 here — alongside 85 others — read 16 August 2026
Фашик Донецький @gistapapapa · 104,724 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 90 here — alongside 89 others — read 15 August 2026
Strike Drone Company @strikedronescompany · 49,198 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 25 August 2026
This channel appears in 194 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.
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 26 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Офіцер” (@officer_33), 182,869 subscribers as measured 26 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/officer_33.
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.