3 measurements spanning 7 days, net -2. 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 767–769 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
13 Aug 2026, 02:04
767
-2
6 Aug 2026, 15:48
769
no change
5 Aug 2026, 22:00
769
first reading
Engagement
14 posts held, back to 9 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 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
145.6%
avg views ÷ 767 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,120
11 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.22%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
12
of 14 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 3 August 2026
Posts held
14 (9 July 2026 – 3 August 2026)
Views total
12,284
Reactions total
150
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
6 Aug 2026, 15:48 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
195 reactions across 13 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 36.4% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
71
36.4%
custom 5249230620248258089
32
16.4%
custom 5298574902511546284
25
12.8%
custom 5235849967465148613
16
8.21%
custom 5233265402175325502
14
7.18%
custom 5341336593342934090
11
5.64%
custom 6161421686110424498
11
5.64%
custom 5299019766634138818
9
4.62%
custom 5244985989968988781
5
2.56%
custom 5269335297736345395
1
0.513%
Custom emoji. 9 of the rows above are 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 counts beside them areTelegram’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 13 of the 14 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 195reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 14 most recent posts we hold, published 9 July 2026 to 3 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.
🚄 Гуманоиды покоряют Сапсан
РЖД провели испытания Unitree G1 в качестве проводника в поезде. Железного сотрудника зовут Володя. Он встречал пассажиров, проверял документы и билеты, и даже провел дегустацию вина в вагоне-бистро. Говорят, робот справился успешно 😯
Компания не уточняет, как управлялся робот. Очень сомневаюсь, что он действовал автономно. Ранее на форуме РИММ РЖД рассказывала о своих планах внедрения р…
🗣 Первое международное интервью основателя Unitree
Ван Синсин и новый робот GD01 украсили обложку TIME.
О чем рассказал генеральный директор
⭐ при создании GD01 команда вдохновлялась роботами из Аватара.
⭐ «ChatGPT moment» для гуманоидов еще ждать от 2 до 10 лет. Тогда роботы смогут выполнять большинство задач в незнакомых средах и после смогут работать в коммерческой среде.
⭐ через 10 лет в каждой семье будет мале…
The shares total 107%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.
Мы, Роботы pinned «⚠️ Подписчики, общий сбор! Заметила, что стало меньше реакций и активности в постах 💻 Понимаю, что это связано с доступом в тг в целом, поэтому скоро запущу конкурс для читателей 🎁 Пишите в комментариях, что хотите в качестве призов? А для тех, кому совсем…»
⚠️ Подписчики, общий сбор!
Заметила, что стало меньше реакций и активности в постах 💻
Понимаю, что это связано с доступом в тг в целом, поэтому скоро запущу конкурс для читателей 🎁
Пишите в комментариях, что хотите в качестве призов?
А для тех, кому совсем неудобно тут, напоминаю, что все посты дублируются в Максе. И может, запустим еще одну площадку, как думаете? 🙂
@robotswe [Max]
❤️ Роботы сразились в Шэньчжэне
Первый бой в стиле смешанных единоборств (MMA) состоялся в Китае. Два робота от EngineAI T800 встретились на ринге. Команды могли ставить дополнительную броню и всячески модернизировать гуманоидов.
Во время поединка белый робот почти снес голову серому: в итоге победил последний 🥂
@robotswe [Max]
🤌 У NEO новые руки
Компания 1X поделилась впечатляющим видео, где продемонстрировала обновленные кисти робота. У каждой по 25 степеней свободы и тактильная обратная связь. Прямо почти как у живого человека.
Основатель стартапа Бернт Борнич говорит, что сфера робототехники работает над задачей по созданию роборукуже около 70 лет. Действительно ли компания совершила прорыв в робототехнике, сказать сложно. В Китае уже…
🛡️ До форума «РОСТКИ» – меньше двух месяцев!
С 17 по 18 августа в Казани пройдет международная выставка Russia China Expo – одна из ключевых площадок форума «РОСТКИ: Россия и Китай – взаимовыгодное сотрудничество».
Админ канала как инфопартнер узнает, какие роботизированные технологии привезут на экспозицию китайские партнеры и что покажут российские производители.
В выставке примут участие представители реальных …
Showing the 12 most recent of 14 posts we hold for @robotswe. 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.
Polls
The poll we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered it when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.
The shares total 107%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not 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 14 most recent posts we hold, published 9 July 2026 to 3 August 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.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 191,985 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.
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 5 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.
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.
“Мы, Роботы” (@robotswe), 767 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/robotswe.
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.
