19的臭逼真的好鸡巴丑啊啊啊啊啊啊

Channel
匿名树洞广州
@shudongguangzhou
On this record: Topic · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
12,119subscribers
+1,052 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 10,000–31,623.
Register entry
| Telegram ID | -1002593199189 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Usernames | @shudongguangzhou @shudonggz |
| Created | Between 1 March 2025 and 31 July 2025 — estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 7 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 19 September 2026 |
| Measurements held | 65 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 19 September 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/shudongguangzhou |
Topic
Adult — 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 11 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 87% 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.
Growth
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Sept 2026, 09:42 | 12,119 | +31 |
| 18 Sept 2026, 02:20 | 12,088 | +8 |
| 16 Sept 2026, 20:18 | 12,080 | +34 |
| 16 Sept 2026, 00:40 | 12,046 | +5 |
| 15 Sept 2026, 01:18 | 12,041 | +8 |
| 14 Sept 2026, 09:16 | 12,033 | +9 |
| 13 Sept 2026, 11:01 | 12,024 | +17 |
| 12 Sept 2026, 15:37 | 12,007 | +10 |
| 11 Sept 2026, 13:35 | 11,997 | +42 |
| 10 Sept 2026, 17:17 | 11,955 | +31 |
| 8 Sept 2026, 20:18 | 11,924 | +23 |
| 7 Sept 2026, 17:18 | 11,901 | +116 |
| 5 Sept 2026, 12:15 | 11,785 | +44 |
| 4 Sept 2026, 15:15 | 11,741 | +82 |
| 3 Sept 2026, 12:18 | 11,659 | +80 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 22:54 | 11,579 | +19 |
| 2 Sept 2026, 04:06 | 11,560 | +6 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 23:46 | 11,554 | +7 |
| 1 Sept 2026, 03:45 | 11,547 | no change |
| 1 Sept 2026, 02:14 | 11,547 | first reading |
Engagement
842 posts held, back to 7 August 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 44 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
- ERR · 30 days
- 2.02%
- avg views ÷ 12,119 subscribers
- Avg views / post
- 245
- 300 posts measured
- Reaction rate
- 0.339%
- reactions ÷ views · ER floor
- Posts in window
- 300
- of 842 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 22 of 300 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 2 September 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 842 (7 August 2026 – 2 September 2026) |
| Views total | 73,355 |
| Reactions total | 26 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 2 Sept 2026, 23:42 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 04s
- Average length
- 8s
Measured directly from 8 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
68 reactions across 38 posts, in 10 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 61.8% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 👍 | 42 | 61.8% | |
| ❤ | 15 | 22.1% | |
| 💩 | 4 | 5.88% | |
| 👎 | 1 | 1.47% | |
| 👏 | 1 | 1.47% | |
| 🔥 | 1 | 1.47% | |
| 😁 | 1 | 1.47% | |
| 🤡 | 1 | 1.47% | |
| 🤣 | 1 | 1.47% | |
| 🤮 | 1 | 1.47% |
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 52 of the 842 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 68 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 842 most recent posts we hold, published 7 August 2026 to 2 September 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.
Recent posts
你见过谁洞里的肉发白啊?那不是相机把亮色变白,暗色变黑是什么?
https://t.me/shudongguangzhou/88166 https://t.me/DWQCJSP
19是不是准备要降价了
https://t.me/shudongguangzhou/88169 龟男,洞里跟阴唇对比下,黑就黑还洗?
也有可能大哥们都有点良心,不会特意去黑一个人。把一个人拍丑可太简单了,原相机在暗光里开闪光拍照,那能不黑吗?
哪里有无了,几分几秒 #广州 #修车 #树洞
大圈,洋妞,处女,孕妇奶妈,关注朴叫兽,带你玩转外围圈。私信: @ww119114 .ads 这是一条广告 👑 朴叫兽外围(盯全国)
19的视频没有?做了几年都没人拍?都是些龟男不敢发?
https://t.me/shudongguangzhou/88164 https://t.me/DWQCJSP 限时开放
跪求6分钟的佳佳视频
跪求
Showing the 12 most recent of 842 posts we hold for @shudongguangzhou. 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.
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.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
Names
Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.
@sdindex · 11,28615 posts树洞图片区
@shudongphoto · 9,66313 posts北京【洞洞】男群
@bjddnq · 3,88112 posts广州【洞洞】男群
@gzddnq · 2,25012 posts上海【洞洞】男群
@shddnq · 2,24712 posts深圳【洞洞】男群
@szddnq · 2,46912 posts树洞【实时】修车地图
@shudongmap · 4,6678 posts安迪频道—山月记💕💕
@andihanhanai · 10,1695 posts树洞百科Wiki
@shudongbaike4 · 2,5504 posts树洞雷报北京
@shudongleibao_bj · 2,1634 posts树洞雷报广州
@shudongleibao_gz · 2,2814 posts树洞雷报杭州
@shudongleibao_hz · 1,6704 posts树洞雷报上海
@shudongleibao_sh · 1,8834 posts树洞雷报深圳
@shudongleibao_sz · 2,0244 posts树洞情报站
@shudongqingbao2 · 1,4054 posts天琳的朋友圈
@anqi251129 · 3,6003 posts大湾区筹集视频
@DWQCJSP · 582 posts广州👭大大【 选妃总频道 】
@qq3659261746 · 14,4752 posts颜宝的朋友圈🧚♀️
@AAA22899 · 5191 post广州白云-珂妍🌸
@keyan17812 · 6,0091 post匿名树洞佛山
@shudongfoshan2 · 1,5651 post纹纹得后花园❤️
@xiaowenwen999 · 3,0271 post舌钉潇渝
@xiaoyuzzyy · 2,5311 post小樱桃🍒 超级美丽
@yintao7758 · 5,3921 post
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
- Dead references
- 2
- handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
- Evidenced gone
- 1
- we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
- Never seen alive
- 1
- vacant every time we have ever looked
@shudongguangzhou named 2 handles that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Evidenced gone
We ourselves saw each of these resolve to a real page at some point before it went vacant — a genuine, evidenced change, not an inference from absence.
named in 1 post, 2 September 2026 – 2 September 2026 · confirmed gone 2 September 2026 (two independent sightings — see how we confirm a dead handle)evidenced
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
named in 1 post, 29 August 2026 – 29 August 2026
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 19 September 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“匿名树洞广州” (@shudongguangzhou), 12,119 subscribers as measured 19 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/shudongguangzhou.
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.