Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for sayology

Channel

sayology

@sayology

On this record: Topic · Previous handles · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry

2,136subscribers

+1,482 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1003986263292
TypeChannel
Username@sayology
CreatedBetween 1 April 2026 and 10 July 2026 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded8 August 2026
Last confirmed live18 September 2026
Measurements held12
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 18 September 2026
On Telegramt.me/sayology

Topic

Health & wellness — 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 16 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 71% 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 why it has no browse page of its own yet.

Previous handles

@sayology was previously reachable at these 2 handles, before switching to its current one. This says nothing about who or what answers at the old handle today — only that this channel no longer does.

@sayapsycho
held 22 August 202622 August 2026
@chekotory
held 8 August 20268 August 2026

Growth

6532,1361,394.57 August 2026 — 654 subscribers7 August 2026 — 653 subscribers8 August 2026 — 653 subscribers22 August 2026 — 911 subscribers22 August 2026 — 930 subscribers31 August 2026 — 1,010 subscribers31 August 2026 — 1,010 subscribers1 September 2026 — 1,067 subscribers6 September 2026 — 1,163 subscribers11 September 2026 — 1,710 subscribers14 September 2026 — 1,953 subscribers18 September 2026 — 2,136 subscribers7 August 202618 September 2026
12 measurements spanning 42 days, net +1,482. 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 431–2,358 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
18 Sept 2026, 21:182,136+183
14 Sept 2026, 12:571,953+243
11 Sept 2026, 02:391,710+547
6 Sept 2026, 03:571,163+96
1 Sept 2026, 13:481,067+57
31 Aug 2026, 20:301,010no change
31 Aug 2026, 20:151,010+80
22 Aug 2026, 16:23930+19
22 Aug 2026, 05:45911+258
8 Aug 2026, 02:46653no change
7 Aug 2026, 23:13653-1
7 Aug 2026, 19:43654first reading

Engagement

46 posts held, back to 10 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 3 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
29.0%
avg views ÷ 2,136 subscribers
Avg views / post
620
10 posts measured
Reaction rate
8.25%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
10
of 46 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. It is computed over the 9 of 10 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 31 August 2026
Posts held46 (10 July 202631 August 2026)
Views total6,199
Reactions total510
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken31 Aug 2026, 20:30 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

Video runtime
1m 14s
Average length
37s

Measured directly from 2 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

2,125 reactions across 45 posts, in 1 kind.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
2,125100.0%

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 45 of the 46 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 2,125 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 46 most recent posts we hold, published 10 July 2026 to 31 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.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
170
across the posts below
Posts paid on
29
of 46 we hold a reading for · 63%
Most on one post
21
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @sayology. 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 46 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 10 July 2026 to 31 August 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

31 Aug 2026, 20:27 UTC19 viewsread 31 August 2026

Пока все делятся в stories своими итогами к концу лета,вы можете прочитать пост выше внимательно и поставить реакции)) Вдруг забыли 🐈‍⬛

31 Aug 2026, 18:00 UTC268 views22 reactions5 Starsread 31 August 2026
Video

ты: живёшь, посещаешь психотерапевта, отпускаешь ситуации, находишь им рациональное решение и наконец учишься понимать свои эмоции. то самое «спишь?» посреди ночи, которое запускает процесс воспоминаний.

22

31 Aug 2026, 11:41 UTC502 views63 reactions6 Starsread 31 August 2026
Video message

Video message, posted without a caption

63

29 Aug 2026, 11:42 UTC737 views77 reactions6 Starsread 31 August 2026

И всегда буду повторять - конечна только смерть. Пока у вас бьется сердце, ноги держат, а руки не дрожат разливая воду - вы всё сможете, при условии если захотите жить. Жизни не нужны наши шансы, а вот тебе, как человеку, ещё как. - и не преуменьшайте свои старания, шанс может быть даже в том, что вы уже дошли до врача и обратились за психотерапевтической помощью, а может быть в помытой голове за неделю. Не преумень

77

29 Aug 2026, 11:32 UTC695 views50 reactions2 Starsread 31 August 2026
Video message

Video message, posted without a caption

50

28 Aug 2026, 15:50 UTC≈1,020 views87 reactions3 Starsread 31 August 2026

Если кто-то не делает так, как делаем мы - это ещё не значит что он чего-то не выдерживает, стыдится, боится, не проработал и не интегрировал. Это может значить, что он просто не хочет делать так, как мы, ему нравится иначе. Он - другой)).

87

27 Aug 2026, 15:50 UTC724 views83 reactions21 Starsread 31 August 2026

Я просто в шоке. Я вот реально, искренне не понимаю, какое отношение некоторые мужчины готовы терпеть в свой адрес. Какие-то typical капризы со стороны женского пола. Терпение нелепых суждений-необдуманных, ничем не подкреплённых. Постоянные уступки, отказ от собственных принципов. И в какой-то момент этот стержень начинает колебаться. Дай Бог, чтобы он вообще присутствовал-это уже удача. «Ну она ведь хочет это, это

83

26 Aug 2026, 13:15 UTC857 views64 reactions5 Starsread 31 August 2026

Психологический эксперимент В 1920 году Джон Уотсон показал маленькому ребёнку белую крысу. Ребёнок её не боялся. Но каждый раз, когда он приближался к крысе, психолог издавал громкий пугающий звук. Через несколько повторений ребёнок начал бояться уже самой крысы. Вывод: некоторые наши страхи-не врождённые. Мы можем научиться бояться того, что когда-то само по себе не представляло для нас угрозы.

64

25 Aug 2026, 15:38 UTC≈1,290 views56 reactions20 Starsread 31 August 2026

Когда они говорят: «Манипулируй другими, чтобы получить желаемое» а Карл Юнг (Швейцарский психолог ,психотерапевт и философ XX века) сказал: «Знай все теории, овладей всеми техниками, но когда прикасаешься к человеческой душе — будь просто человеческой душой»

56

23 Aug 2026, 08:36 UTC≈1,570 views76 reactions7 Starsread 31 August 2026
Photo

Photo, posted without a caption

76

22 Aug 2026, 17:47 UTC≈1,540 views58 reactions4 Starsread 31 August 2026

Никогда не было и не будет такого, что в заднице оказаться плохо, это не плохо, это часть нашего существования, свидетельство течения жизни и есть её непостоянство. Плохо другое - если в этой заднице ты обустроился.

58

Showing the 12 most recent of 46 posts we hold for @sayology. 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.

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.

16 Aug 2026, 12:57 UTCAnonymous Poll99 voters

И теперь у меня вопрос: а обратились бы вы к психологу?

  1. думаю,что да70%
  2. скорее ,нет34%

The shares total 104%, 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 46 most recent posts we hold, published 10 July 2026 to 31 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.

Forward network

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 2 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.

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 18 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“sayology” (@sayology), 2,136 subscribers as measured 18 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/sayology.

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.