Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

Синельников-Оришак

@sinelor

On this record: Topic · Observations · Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

4,798subscribers

-3 since we began measuring on 5 August 2026

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

Register entry

Telegram ID-1001166428820
TypeChannel
Username@sinelor
DescriptionСложно о простом - потому что в непростое время; авторский канал о политике, экономике, России и США Для связи @Sine_or
Created18 March 2018measured — cross-checked against a third-party dataset (ext.tg_channel)
First recorded6 August 2026
Last confirmed live12 August 2026
Measurements held4
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 12 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/sinelor

Topic

Politics & activism — a classification, not a measurement. An on-box language model (Qwen3.6-35B-A3B-UD-Q6_K_XL, prompt version 1) read this channel’s own recent posts on 11 August 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 98% 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.

Observations

These are measurements, not verdicts. Each one below states something we counted, alongside the evidence it was counted from, so you can check it rather than take it. None of them is graded: every observation this register holds is recorded at severity 0, because the precision of the detectors behind them has not been measured yet, and a rating we cannot support is worse than none. Read each as a fact about the data, not as a judgement about the channel. How we measure.

Views per post sit far above this size band

9,200 average views per post against 4,798 subscribers — an engagement rate of 191.7%. Across the 40,483 registered channels in the same cohort — 3,163–9,999 subscribers, posting mainly in Russian — the middle half sit between 7.15% and 26.5%, with a median of 14.2%.

What this was computed from
Window30 days (13 July 2026 12 August 2026)
Posts measured19 of 20 published in the window (3 exact, 16 rounded by Telegram)
Views totalled174,785
Mature posts only191.7% over 19 posts read at least 24h after publication
Subscribers4,798 measured 12 August 2026
Cohortb3162:rus · 40,483 channels · p10 3.46% · p25 7.15% · p50 14.2% · p75 26.5% · p90 43.8%
Position in cohort99.723th percentile · 13.5× the cohort median
Uncertainty±0.067% of the figure, from Telegram’s rounding
Post languageRussian · 100.0%of the window’s posts

When this is recorded. A channel is listed here only when its engagement rate sits at or above the 99th percentile of its cohort and is at least 3× away from that cohort’s median — above it — on both the all-readings figure and the mature-only figure. The percentile alone would be circular: a percentile cut puts the same share of every cohort in the tail whatever the data looks like. The distance from the median is what makes it a statement about this channel.

This is not a verdict, and the direction is not a quality signal.A low rate has many innocent causes — audiences that read in the Telegram app without opening the channel, a subscriber base built long before the current output, an audience in a different timezone from our reading. A high rate has innocent causes too: a post that travelled far beyond the channel’s own subscribers will do it. We publish the measurement and the distribution it sits in. The full cohort baselines are downloadable, so this comparison can be reproduced rather than trusted.

Recorded under the key err_high, last confirmed 12 August 2026. An observation that a later pass no longer finds is cleared, and a cleared observation is removed from this page rather than being shown struck through — we do not keep publishing a claim we have withdrawn. Dispute an observation.

Growth

4,7984,8014,799.55 August 2026 — 4,801 subscribers6 August 2026 — 4,801 subscribers9 August 2026 — 4,799 subscribers12 August 2026 — 4,798 subscribers5 August 202612 August 2026
4 measurements spanning 6 days, net -3. 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 4,798–4,801 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
12 Aug 2026, 03:454,798-1
9 Aug 2026, 01:214,799-2
6 Aug 2026, 03:504,801no change
5 Aug 2026, 23:294,801first reading

Engagement

20 posts held, back to 17 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 8 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
191.7%
avg views ÷ 4,798 subscribers
Avg views / post
9,200
19 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.221%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
20
of 20 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
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 5 August 2026
Posts held20 (17 July 20265 August 2026)
Views total174,785
Reactions total387
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken12 Aug 2026, 05:19 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

Photos
688
Videos
118
Links
2,310

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 12 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. A count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints these counters in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈142,000 means somewhere between 141,500 and 142,499.

Reaction mix

387 reactions across 19 posts, in 23 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 26.1% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
👍10126.1%
👏9223.8%
😁6817.6%
🔥4812.4%
348.79%
🤔61.55%
😐51.29%
🤡51.29%
🥴41.03%
👀30.775%
😢30.775%
💊20.517%
😡20.517%
😨20.517%
🙉20.517%
🤯20.517%
🦄20.517%
💋10.258%
💯10.258%
🤨10.258%
3 further kinds30.775%

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 19 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 387reactions 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 17 July 2026 to 5 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.

Recent posts

5 Aug 2026, 08:56 UTC≈8,830 views27 reactionsread 12 August 2026

При всех советских корнях нынешняя политическая система скорее правая, чем левая. И даже сильно правая... Именно это и есть следствие травмы распада СССР... Фиаско левого советского проекта сделало левую идею неприличной и лузерской. Особенно для истеблишмента 50+ и старше. Для них левая идея – это дефицит, неэффективность, безответственность управленческой системы, Шариков, Швондер и вызов самой идее индивидуализма

👏184🤔2🔥1🤡1😁1

3 Aug 2026, 15:16 UTC≈11,000 views28 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Как обычно не говорится, но есть три новости - банальная, плохая и хорошая: мы все умрем (но не одновременно); планетарная медиана продолжительности жизни сейчас - 79 лет; а максимум отпущенный нашим организмам мог бы составлять по математическому моделированию - 149 лет. Библейскому Ною, напомню, насчитали - 950 . (Бытие 9:29: «Всех же дней Ноевых было девятьсот пятьдесят лет, и он умер»). Начнем с истоков - все

👍14🔥7👏2🤯21🤔1😢1

1 Aug 2026, 16:12 UTC≈5,090 views20 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Плач про "августовское проклятие России", видимо, надолго, ибо в сезон отпусков и новостного затишья любое ЧП забирает 100% медийного внимания. Естественно, наплевать на статистику за последние 35 лет: по числу крупных катастроф август находится лишь в середине годового списка, уступая зиме - из-за пиковых нагрузок на инфраструктуру и тяжелой погоды пик техногенных аварий и пожаров в РФ исторически приходится на дек

👏152💯1🤡1😁1

29 Jul 2026, 07:42 UTC≈5,170 views27 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Как-то все мельчает, вот ранее, бывало, авторитета подрывали в автомобиле, а теперь подрыв авторитета выглядит очень уж... виртуально. Не иначе - автоконцерны виноваты, вот и Дмитрий Песков в сообщении ТАСС от 31 августа 2024 года так считает: "Террористы пользуются не только мессенджерами, но и автомобилями, при этом автоконцерны никто не арестовывает, подчеркнул Дмитрий Песков. "Да, действительно, террористы поль

😁20👏6🤩1

27 Jul 2026, 11:29 UTC≈7,310 views17 reactionsread 12 August 2026

... повисшим в воздухе остается вопрос о том, почему Касым-Жомарт Кемелевич выбрал адресатом своего миротворческого выступления ... Первый главарь ФСО Коржаков в своей книге: "Я часто поражался сложности и надуманности умозаключений. Эксперты и политологи выстраивают целые теории, анализируют мифические цепочки кремлевских взаимоотношений, чтобы логично объяснить то или иное..." Вот-вот, поэтому не исключено, что

😁17

24 Jul 2026, 14:35 UTC≈1,480 views22 reactionsread 12 August 2026

В интервью британскому журналу The Economist американский предприниматель Илон Маск заявил, что через пять лет искусственный интеллект (ИИ) может превзойти совокупный интеллект человечества Херню сказал - обыграть в шахматы, не значит изобрести шахматы, а не подобие шахмат, где вепрь вместо коня ходит буквой В.

🔥12👏5😁5

24 Jul 2026, 13:14 UTC≈11,600 views14 reactionsread 12 August 2026

...исходя из данных статистики, все более реалистичной кажется версия о каннибализации оборудования "Каннибализация" (механизмов) переживает второе рождение, изначально аircraft cannibalization (авиационная каннибализация) официально зафиксировано в документах ВВС США еще в середине XX века (термин активно применялся во время Второй мировой, Корейской и Вьетнамской войн, когда снабжение баз деталями задерживалось)

👏104

23 Jul 2026, 21:46 UTC≈1,030 views20 reactionsread 12 August 2026

По решению, принятому 23 июля 2026 года, ключевая ставка Центробанка Турции осталась на уровне 37% годовых. Турция с кем-то воюет? Или Турция под санкциями? Хороший вопрос! Вот это вот все благодаря "эрдаганомике ставки" - года 4 опускали и в два притопа: в 2019-2020, Эрдоганом был уволен глава турецкого ЦБ за отказ подчиниться, зато новый глава быстро упал в ноги с 24% до 8,25%. Осенью 2020 года из-за обвала ли

👍16😐21🤔1

23 Jul 2026, 16:40 UTC≈7,050 views22 reactionsread 12 August 2026

Росстат уже более двух с половиной лет не использует в отчетах формулировки "рост цен" и "подорожание", заменяя их оборотом "цены изменились". Последний раз выражения "выросли цены", "увеличение цен" и "подорожали" встречались в отчете от 27 декабря 2023 года. При этом для товаров, которые стали дешевле, ведомство продолжает использовать формулировку "цены снизились". Эффективность "подтопления", "хлопка" и "задымле

👍13🔥4🥴41

21 Jul 2026, 22:11 UTCviews —

Синельников-Оришак pinned «PR - это всего лишь Повод и Распространение Очень кстати статья в "Нью-Йорк Таймс", а то объясняешь иногда, объясняешь, что оказывается можно корретировать "мнение" ИИ для оптимума соответствующей выдачи, в ответ же туземное: "и чо?" Но совсем другое дело…»

21 Jul 2026, 21:14 UTC≈1,070 views12 reactionsread 12 August 2026

PR - это всего лишь Повод и Распространение Очень кстати статья в "Нью-Йорк Таймс", а то объясняешь иногда, объясняешь, что оказывается можно корретировать "мнение" ИИ для оптимума соответствующей выдачи, в ответ же туземное: "и чо?" Но совсем другое дело, если и "белые люди" тоже так делают. Суть пунктиром: ‎ Кандидат Дастин Ллойд от демократов успешно оптимизировал выдачу ИИ-чат-ботов, публикуя структурированные

👍6👀32🤷‍♂1

21 Jul 2026, 13:32 UTC927 views12 reactionsread 12 August 2026
Photo

⬆️добровольческие БАРСы типа - элита, а ВС РФ - всё остальное, хотя вроде бы должно быть строго наоборот? Да хрен с ним со "строгостями", нет ли желания у сенатора войти "не в ту", а другую "дверь" - элементарно разобраться хотя бы со всеми этими вербовочными "ипешками" и "ооошками", ну пусть не со "всеми", а хотя бы "преподать урок" для острастки, нет-нет не в ту зону, а в другую: получили, суки, цену как за полноц

👍6👏3🔥21

Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @sinelor. 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 — 111,961 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

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 13 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 12 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“Синельников-Оришак” (@sinelor), 4,798 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/sinelor.

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.