Be careful out there today 👀
❤7🔥2

Channel
@rokasict
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Polls · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
11,102subscribers
-308 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
| Telegram ID | -1002213455084 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @rokasict |
| Created | Between 1 June 2024 and 30 September 2024 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 5 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 28 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 5 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/rokasict |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 5 Sept 2026, 03:57 | 11,102 | -17 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 11:36 | 11,119 | -16 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 08:04 | 11,135 | -4 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 10:56 | 11,139 | -16 |
| 31 Aug 2026, 07:17 | 11,155 | -8 |
| 30 Aug 2026, 07:35 | 11,163 | -9 |
| 29 Aug 2026, 04:13 | 11,172 | -10 |
| 28 Aug 2026, 03:14 | 11,182 | -5 |
| 27 Aug 2026, 01:43 | 11,187 | -11 |
| 26 Aug 2026, 01:33 | 11,198 | -14 |
| 25 Aug 2026, 00:17 | 11,212 | -24 |
| 23 Aug 2026, 12:44 | 11,236 | -18 |
| 21 Aug 2026, 21:58 | 11,254 | -15 |
| 20 Aug 2026, 16:58 | 11,269 | -2 |
| 19 Aug 2026, 20:12 | 11,271 | -15 |
| 18 Aug 2026, 20:45 | 11,286 | -10 |
| 17 Aug 2026, 21:04 | 11,296 | -13 |
| 16 Aug 2026, 21:44 | 11,309 | -14 |
| 15 Aug 2026, 14:27 | 11,323 | -11 |
| 14 Aug 2026, 02:08 | 11,334 | first reading |
20 posts held, back to 16 March 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 41 pages of 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 7 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
222 reactions across 20 posts, in 9 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 73.4% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 163 | 73.4% | |
| 🔥 | 41 | 18.5% | |
| 👏 | 6 | 2.70% | |
| 💯 | 3 | 1.35% | |
| 🤝 | 3 | 1.35% | |
| ✍ | 2 | 0.901% | |
| 👍 | 2 | 0.901% | |
| ❤🔥 | 1 | 0.45% | |
| 🆒 | 1 | 0.45% |
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 20 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 222 reactions 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 16 March 2026 to 7 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.
Be careful out there today 👀
❤7🔥2
Last 12 hours to grab 65% off FUNDEDHERO CODE: ROKAS65
❤5
should we do prop firm account giveaway? 👀
❤34👏5💯3👍2
Also a crazy strategy reel dropped on ig, go check it out👀
❤5👏1
Let me know what you think in the comments! https://youtu.be/o7pMyMWdGxY
❤8
YouTube video 👀👀👀
❤6❤🔥1
Most traders don't fail prop firm challenges because of bad trading. They fail because the firm's rules never matched how they actually trade. Trading news events on a firm that bans news trading. Swing trading on a firm that calculates daily loss from equity — meaning your open trades count against you in real time. Getting one big winning day then losing the funded account to a consistency rule nobody explained…
❤3🔥2
Working on something that diagnoses exactly why you keep failing - and matches you to the firm whose rules actually fit how you trade. Free tool. Drop a 🔥 if you'd use it.
🔥24❤1
Most traders fail prop challenges for the same reasons 👇 Why did YOU fail your last challenge?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
❤3
Crazy news!! Use code : ROKAS
❤8
Your choice?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
❤4🆒1
giveaway is live, check out my story
❤5
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @rokasict. 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.
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.
Most traders fail prop challenges for the same reasons 👇 Why did YOU fail your last challenge?
Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.
Your choice?
Shares as published. 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 20 most recent posts we hold, published 16 March 2026 to 7 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.
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.
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 5 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Rokas.ict | Analysis | Education” (@rokasict), 11,102 subscribers as measured 5 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/rokasict.
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.