Other / unclassifiable — 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 9 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 46% 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
64 measurements spanning 94 days, net +4,069. 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 38,354–43,685 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 64
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
7 Nov 2026, 15:46
43,038
-11
6 Nov 2026, 15:50
43,049
-10
5 Nov 2026, 15:37
43,059
+12
4 Nov 2026, 14:34
43,047
-17
3 Nov 2026, 14:46
43,064
-6
2 Nov 2026, 13:16
43,070
+20
1 Nov 2026, 13:24
43,050
+3
31 Oct 2026, 14:59
43,047
+65
30 Oct 2026, 11:39
42,982
+41
29 Oct 2026, 12:18
42,941
+51
28 Oct 2026, 09:37
42,890
+55
27 Oct 2026, 13:04
42,835
+105
26 Oct 2026, 14:39
42,730
+164
25 Oct 2026, 12:36
42,566
+33
24 Oct 2026, 09:08
42,533
+52
23 Oct 2026, 11:05
42,481
+53
22 Oct 2026, 14:08
42,428
+113
21 Oct 2026, 05:21
42,315
+156
20 Oct 2026, 05:50
42,159
+158
19 Oct 2026, 04:20
42,001
first reading
Engagement
220 posts held, back to 29 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 179 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
9.96%
avg views ÷ 43,038 subscribers
Avg views / post
4,290
71 posts measured
Reaction rate
13.7%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
71
of 220 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 7 November 2026
Posts held
220 (29 July 2026 – 7 November 2026)
Views total
304,390
Reactions total
41,839
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
8 Nov 2026, 08:22 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
≈3,460
Videos
≈314
Links
≈1,890
Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 8 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.
Video runtime
1h 08m
Average length
1m 48s
Measured directly from 38 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
116,749 reactions across 216 posts, in 25 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 17.9% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🙏
20,896
17.9%
💯
20,432
17.5%
❤
17,072
14.6%
🤬
16,534
14.2%
😭
14,101
12.1%
⚡
9,326
7.99%
💔
7,387
6.33%
🔥
2,228
1.91%
🏆
2,038
1.75%
🤝
1,190
1.02%
😢
1,174
1.01%
🕊
1,133
0.97%
👏
903
0.773%
😱
747
0.64%
😡
622
0.533%
🤯
313
0.268%
❤🔥
308
0.264%
✍
160
0.137%
😨
73
0.063%
💘
45
0.039%
5 further kinds
67
0.057%
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 220 of the 220 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 118,611 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 220 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 7 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
1,745
across the posts below
Posts paid on
210
of 220 we hold a reading for · 95%
Most on one post
105
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @pavel_v_doroge. 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 220 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 29 July 2026 to 7 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: 20 of 71 posts held from the last 30 days (28.2%) 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).
Соратники! Мы готовы сделать следующий шаг в нашей борьбе. Я предлагаю объединить работу в защиту медведей — как крупных территориальных хищников Русской Тайги, которые во многом определяют состояние биологических систем, — с защитой настоящих древних лесов. Специально для этого я уже подготовил, как вы заметили, и опубликовал три крупных материала с научным разбором состояния лесов в масштабах страны. Также всё это …
Это очень показательно, потому что даёт возможность увидеть масштаб системного кризиса. Я начну просто с цитаты заместителя председателя Комитета Госдумы по экологии Анатолия Грешневикова:
«127 миллиардов рублей, выделенных на спасение великой реки, во многом потрачены впустую. Проект превратился в механизм освоения бюджетных средств».
Тут уже несколько раз пытались легализовать сплошные вырубки лесов ЗАЩИТНОЙ кат…
Сейчас столкнулся с главной сложностью: сведением данных об охраняемых природных территориях России. Данные устаревшие, многие сервисы предлагают информацию, но границы уже изменены, что-то новое добавлено, а чего-то давно уже нет. Очень многое приходится делать вручную, сидеть и кропотливо наносить на карту, но вроде всё получается. А где-то массивы данных можно частично интегрировать!
Сама идея в том, что мы сведё…
Мы активно занимаемся разработкой интерактивной карты будущей заповедной системы мира на основе нашей Концепции Территорий полного экологического спокойствия (ТПЭС). На данный момент доработаны пользовательский интерфейс, управление, внутренние механизмы добавления и анализа данных. И мы перешли к сложной части: я хочу интегрировать в нашу интерактивную карту огромный массив данных обо всех действующих охраняемых при…
ГОВОРЯТ, ЧТО ЛЕСОВ В РОССИИ СТАЛО БОЛЬШЕ?
Сейчас повсеместно активно распространяют информацию о том, что лесов в России стало только больше, а значит, никакого уничтожения тайги нет. Причём это активно муссируют медийные лица, СМИ, и в официальных ответах нам об этом пишут чиновники. То есть одна совершенно устойчивая парадигма: если площадь лесов увеличилась, значит, никакой проблемы нет. Причём медийные лица вооб…
Соратники!
Несколько дней потребовалось, чтобы восстановить работу сайта и нашей с вами инфраструктуры по защите дикой природы. Напомню, что ранее проекты были обвалены, люди не могли получить доступ к сайту, серверы были недоступны. Ребята уже всё восстановили, команде респект! Мы продолжаем с вами расширять инфраструктуру, и чем больше будет технических сложностей, тем активнее будем изучать методы адаптации и защ…
Теперь о масштабах уничтожения лесов Сибири и Дальнего Востока. Опять же, внимание: речь идёт о древнейших ТЫСЯЧЕЛЕТНИХ экосистемах. Никакое смещение «чёлки бореального леса» на тундровые зоны не исправит проблему реального разрушения естественных лесов нашей Русской Тайги.
Итак, я подготовил для вас вторую часть материала о масштабах разрушения лесов России, но сегодня мы поговорим именно про Сибирь и Дальний Восто…
Прямо сейчас в крупных СМИ некоторые медийные лица стали активно раскачивать тему, якобы лесов становится только больше и ничего страшного, «если мы отгрызём куски от заповедников», не будет. Подменяют данные, полностью и сознательно игнорируя реальную ситуацию: дело в том, что как шло, так и продолжает идти масштабное уничтожение Русской Тайги. Только за последние 25 лет Россия утратила 53,2 млн га малонарушенных ле…
Лекция Павла Пашкова: Природа умирает на наших глазах, но почему люди этого не замечают?
Подготовил для вас, соратники, небольшое видео о том, как искажается восприятие экологических проблем в обществе и насколько тяжело донести реальные масштабы разрушения дикой природы.
Я думаю, многие наши соратники пытались объяснить какие-то проблемы близким, знакомым и своим собственным друзьям в социальных сетях. Получилось?…
Скоро диким животным будет вообще негде жить. Человек «освоил» под себя уже 75% всей суши планеты — то есть для природы осталось всего около 25%.
Об этом говорят мировые учёные согласно крупнейшему метаисследованию! При этом другие ученые провели дополнительное исследование: они решили узнать, сколько осталось на планете вообще функционально целостных экосистем. Оказалось, что всего 2,8%. Мы добиваем последнее.
И в…
Численность морских обитателей сократилась за последние 50 лет в среднем на 59%, согласно ведущему индексу мировых ученых Living Planet Index от 7 октября 2026 года. Катастрофа, которую никто даже не замечает.
При этом, по глобальной оценке IPBES за 2019 год, 66% морской среды существенно изменено человеком. Причем это данные семилетней давности. За это время всё ускоряется, идет каскадное уничтожение морских экосис…
Я говорю о простейших вещах: уровень основных понятий курса экологии или статьи в энциклопедии. Уровень определения смысла понятий вообще.
Ключевой вид — это вид, который оказывает непропорционально большое влияние на свою естественную среду обитания, на свой биоценоз. Это понятие было введено в науку ещё в 1969 году зоологом Робертом Пейном. Вечность назад при современных темпах изменений в обществе!
Виды-эдификат…
👏207🔥80❤62💯42💔14🙏14🤝7🏆6
Showing the 12 most recent of 220 posts we hold for @pavel_v_doroge. 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
@pavel_v_doroge 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
13 October 2026
Most recent edit
13 October 2026
Polls
The 2 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
Чувствуете ли вы психологическую усталость, состояние потерянности и эмоционального истощения на фоне общего хаоса вокруг? Оцените свое состояние по шкале от 1 до 10
10 — очень тяжело25%
910%
810%
711%
65%
5 — ощущение нереальности происходящего и копится усталость26%
45%
33%
21%
1 — очень легко1%
Shares as published, totalling 97%. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is 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 220 most recent posts we hold, published 29 July 2026 to 7 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 14 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 16 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.
Alexey Sibirsky @alexey_sibirsky · 24,829 Telegram ranks this channel #25 of 77 here — alongside 76 others — read 16 September 2026
ДОКТОР ДЕНИС ИВАНОВ @doctor_denisivanov · 25,951 Telegram ranks this channel #89 of 91 here — alongside 90 others — read 16 September 2026
This channel appears in 2 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.
“ПАВЕЛ ПАШКОВ” (@pavel_v_doroge), 43,038 subscribers as measured 7 November 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/pavel_v_doroge.
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.