Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for 蛋挞报

Channel

蛋挞报

@pincongessence

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

5,637subscribers

-17 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001388969066
TypeChannel
Username@pincongessence
CreatedBetween 1 March 2018 and 31 July 2021— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live16 August 2026
Measurements held5
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 16 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/pincongessence

Growth

5,6375,6555,6466 August 2026 — 5,654 subscribers7 August 2026 — 5,655 subscribers9 August 2026 — 5,648 subscribers12 August 2026 — 5,642 subscribers16 August 2026 — 5,637 subscribers6 August 202616 August 2026
5 measurements spanning 10 days, net -17. 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 5,634–5,658 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
16 Aug 2026, 17:355,637-5
12 Aug 2026, 22:255,642-6
9 Aug 2026, 22:125,648-7
7 Aug 2026, 02:005,655+1
6 Aug 2026, 08:455,654first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 4 May 2025the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 8 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

Nothing published in the last 30 days. ERR and ER are rolling 30-day measures, so there is nothing to compute — we hold 20 posts for this entry, the most recent from 23 July 2025. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.

Reaction mix

124 reactions across 14 posts, in 3 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 87.1% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
10887.1%
🤣1411.3%
🤔21.61%

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 14 of the 20 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 124reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 4 May 2025 to 23 July 2025, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Recent posts

23 Jul 2025, 00:38 UTC≈5,070 views3 reactionsread 12 August 2026

今天恰好读到这两篇,会不会是巧合?可叹越是亟待讨论的问题,往往越不知从何说起。

3

23 Jul 2025, 00:29 UTC≈4,800 views28 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @douban_read

忍了很久暴言:我极度不认可网民一边炫耀自己不婚不育一边贬低婚育女性。 tl;dr:不婚不育没什么了不起,一种流行思潮和社会环境下的自然反应而已。如果说结婚生子是过去随大流的一种,不婚不育也是现在随“大流”的一种。 十年前我也有这个炫耀自己选择“更明智”的需求,因为当时全网的风气还是无差别辱女;女网民带头骂小三和性工作者;我爸听说我决定丁克,闹着要断绝关系;我被迫向每个过问我生活的人解释人生选择,但解释也没用,所有人都说“你们还小,长大了就会改主意。” 但后来方向变了,我发现大概六七年前我就不再需要解释了,反而开始在同事间因为丁克获得认可和羡慕(朋友们不羡慕因为新一届的朋友也都是不要孩子的性少数群体)。也是那时侯学姐们同事们开始当妈妈,有机会进一步了解婚育女性的不容易,发自内心想维护她们。如果这时候还在网上吹自己多英明对方多愚蠢,就在人格上落入下乘了。 我看到的互联网上发帖炫耀自己不婚不育过快乐生活引发狂欢的,基本上都是城

27🤔1

23 Jul 2025, 00:28 UTC≈3,900 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @theinitium_rss

端传媒 - 最新 南京红姐(爷)、郑州打人:男性“出错”,异性恋霸权原谅了谁,驱逐了谁? Telegraph | 原文

4

11 Jul 2025, 02:14 UTC≈3,820 views4 reactionsread 12 August 2026

2025-07-11-去意大利,喝一杯中国浓缩咖啡:华人咖啡馆如何扎根意国街头? | shorten url 2025-07-11-去意大利,喝一杯中國濃縮咖啡:華人咖啡館如何紮根意國街頭? | shorten url

4

1 Jul 2025, 15:35 UTC≈19,200 views14 reactionsread 12 August 2026

分享一个群友推荐的视频。 视频作者 Benn Jordan 认为,现代资本运行的底层逻辑已经发生了本质改变,我们所熟知的资本主义正在经历结构性崩塌。 资本家对个人的剥削,已经超越了传统上通过压榨劳动换取利润的模式。 新型剥削的特征是通过掌握数据、平台、订阅依赖实现对个人的持续控制。 内容生产者无法拥有最终的数据权或收益权,变成了依赖平台生存的“数字佃农” 资本家通过无尽的租用和订阅让用户长期处于缺乏参与和决策的被动状态。 企业甚至不再以利润最大化为首要目标,而是不断追求拓展影响力和数据霸权。 无论你是否同意作者的所有观点,他描述的现象都值得我们警觉和深思。 如果永远等不到系统自我修复的那一天,我们还可以做点什么? 备注:观看长视频对注意力是种挑战。在此拥抱每一个认真看完视频的你,感谢共同走过这段思考的旅程:)

14

9 Jun 2025, 04:19 UTC≈3,110 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @MothLib

吴谢宇案|没有人是这个社会的“陌生人”

2

6 Jun 2025, 02:12 UTC≈2,960 viewsread 12 August 2026

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/05/us/trump-elon-musk

5 Jun 2025, 00:27 UTC≈2,540 views26 reactionsread 12 August 2026

🕯️纪念六四,不忘历史

18🤣8

4 Jun 2025, 01:31 UTC≈2,470 viewsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @theinitium_rss

端传媒 - 最新 六四36年,专访历史学者何晓清:被逼离港后,我们还是在一起的 Telegraph | 原文

27 May 2025, 02:56 UTC≈2,330 views2 reactionsread 12 August 2026

https://youtu.be/HZ3j4hHMO5E https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Reich

2

24 May 2025, 15:45 UTC≈1,930 views7 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Forwarded from @theinitium_rss

端传媒 - 最新 【异乡人】慕容雪村:我与我的审查员 Telegraph | 原文

7

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @pincongessence. 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

Citation-graph rank — 1,120,212 of 1,480,975entries 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.

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 1 registered channel — 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.

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 16 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“蛋挞报” (@pincongessence), 5,637 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/pincongessence.

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.