4 measurements spanning 7 days, net -14. 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 8,161–8,180 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
13 Aug 2026, 04:59
8,163
-15
10 Aug 2026, 01:21
8,178
+1
7 Aug 2026, 04:48
8,177
no change
6 Aug 2026, 12:15
8,177
first reading
Engagement
21 posts held, back to 20 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 11 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
58.6%
avg views ÷ 8,163 subscribers
Avg views / post
4,790
2 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.899%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
2
of 21 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 10 August 2026
Posts held
21 (20 January 2026 – 10 August 2026)
Views total
9,570
Reactions total
86
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Aug 2026, 16:41 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.
Reaction mix
704 reactions across 19 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 89.9% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
👍
633
89.9%
👎
71
10.1%
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 19 of the 21 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 704reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 20 January 2026 to 10 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.
EB-2 NIW — I-485 Approved
I-140 Approval: Nov. 25, 2024
I-485 & I-765 Filing: Oct. 23, 2025
Biometrics: Nov. 19, 2025
Silent Update: July 1, 2026
I-765 (EAD) Approval: July 17, 2026
EAD delivered: July 23, 2026
I-485 Approval: Aug. 8, 2026
Current status at the time of approval: F-1
Graduation: Expected December 2026
No interview. No congressional inquiry. No lawsuit.
Total I-485 processing time: approximately 9.…
📤 Priority Date: 12 February 2024
I-140 Approval: June 2024
—————————————————
📤 I-485 Filed: 27 October 2025
📤 I-765 Filed: 27 October 2025
📤 Biometrics Appointment: 2 January 2026
📤 Biometrics Applied to Both Cases: 5 January 2026
—————————————————
I-485 Approved: 13 July 2026
Green Card Produced: 17 July 2026
I-485 Case Closed
اینترویو نداشتم. شکایت نکرده بودم. سربازی نداشتم.
ممنون از ادمینای عزیز گروه و امیدو…
• Filing Date: Feb 2025
• Premium Processing Date: Nov 2025
• RFE Notice Received Date: Jan 2026
• Denial Date: July 2026
• Lawsuit Filed: No
• Service Center: Nebraska
• Attorney / Law Firm: porter
• Major: bioengineering
• Number of Papers at filing: 4 journals, 2 conferences
• Citation Count at filing: 4
• Citation Count at RFE: 96
• Recommendation Letters: none
توضیحات:
من به شدت از پورتر ناراضی بودم، اول …
Priority Date: 1/4/2024
Date I-907 Received (Premium Processing): july 2025
Date Approved: Oct 2025
Center: Nebraska
Attorney: Porter
Field: genetic
Papers: 22
Citations: 350
#فرم_۱۴۰
#اپروال
EAD and I485
File 22 Dec 2025
Biometric 23 Feb 2026
EAD aproval notice 1 July 2026
Priority Date: September 20, 2024
Premium Processing (I-907) Filed: November 28, 2025
RFE Received: February 3, 2026
I-140 Denied: June 26, 2026
Attorney: Chen: Burkett (Original) and Lago (RFE)
Field: Engineering
Number of Publications at filing: 5
Number of Citations: 20 (59 at RFE)
توضیحات:
امروز نامه Denial به دستم رسید. فقط Prong اول اوکی شده. توی RFE هر سه Prong رو ایراد گرفته بودن.
#فرم_۱۴۰
#denial
Priority Date: November 07, 2025
Premium Processing (I-907) Filed: November 26, 2025
RFE Responded: April 20, 2026
I-140 Accepted: June, 23, 2026
Lawyer: Chen
Field: Cancer Research
Number of Publications: 6
Number of Citations: 41 (65 at acceptance)
توضیحات:
بدون شکایت
امیدوارم همگی خیلی زود خبرای خوبی بگیرین 🙏🏻
#فرم_۱۴۰
#اپروال
Priority Date: October 11, 2024
Premium Processing (I-907) Filed: November 19, 2025
RFE Responded: April, 23, 2026
I-140 Accepted: June, 23, 2026
Lawyer: Useless Ellis Porter (Stephanie Hou)
Mass Action: Useless IMMPACT Litigation (Kuck)
Field: Civil & Environmental Engineering
Number of Publications: 3
Number of Citations: 27 (84 at RFE time, 110 at acceptance)
توضیحات:
پورتر واقعا ضعیف کار کرد و وقت نذاشت. من …
به ما ربطی نداره، جای نگرانی نیست!
* قانون اومد: دانشجوهای ایرانی از ورود به آمریکا ممنوع شدند.
• بعضیا واکنش دادند: بعضی از دانشجو های داخل آمریکا، به ما مربوط نمیشه، جای نگرانی نیست.
+ بعضیا سفیدشویی کردن: حق دارند و قانون درستیه چون نگرانن جاسوس بیاد داخل کشورشون
* قانون اومد: فرآیند تغییر استتوس چندین کشور، من جمله ایرانی ها متوقف شد. اوناییکه از دانشجویی میخواد وارد کار بشه یا گرین کارت بگیره، متضرر اصلی …
چون کاربران قدیمی آمریکامون در مورد توقف های uscis سوال پرسیدن و خیلی هاشون الان واسه شهروندی درخواست داده و سوالات زیادی پرسیدن، علی رغم اینکه ما روی شهروندی ها تمرکز نمی کنیم به احترام دوستان قدیمی خلاصه و مروری میکنیم و در نهایت توصیه خود را می نویسیم.
ممکنه جزییاتی کم و زیاد شده باشه چون فرصت نشد جزییات رو بررسی کنیم، و اگه نکته مهمی دیدین فراموش کردین لطفا باهامون به اشتراک بذارین.
در بررسی sourceهای رسمی USCI…
Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @pargargc. 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.
Forward network
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.
Mentions
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
1
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
0
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
1
vacant every time we have ever looked
@pargargc named 1 handle that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all.A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@supportpgc named in 4 posts, 8 August 2026 – 13 August 2026
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 13 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“US Green Card News” (@pargargc), 8,163 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/pargargc.
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.