Parenting & family — 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 22 September 2026 and assigned it the closest of 31 fixed categories, at 90% 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
8 measurements spanning 63 days, net -13. 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 353–370 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
9 Oct 2026, 11:17
355
-2
30 Sept 2026, 00:57
357
-1
12 Sept 2026, 12:41
358
-1
4 Sept 2026, 21:39
359
-1
28 Aug 2026, 17:05
360
-3
14 Aug 2026, 22:07
363
-5
8 Aug 2026, 06:20
368
no change
7 Aug 2026, 13:16
368
first reading
Engagement
16 posts held, back to 21 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 page 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 16 posts for this entry, the most recent from 6 August 2026. An engagement rate over an empty window would be a number about nothing.
What this channel posts
Video runtime
2m 12s
Average length
26s
Measured directly from 5 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
72 reactions across 16 posts, in 9 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 27.8% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
20
27.8%
👍
15
20.8%
custom 5456508537976941140
10
13.9%
🔥
7
9.72%
🤩
5
6.94%
custom 5422515104484696927
4
5.56%
custom 5454113157406550393
4
5.56%
custom 5467497757264605477
4
5.56%
custom 5458829804591673353
3
4.17%
Custom emoji. 5 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 are Telegram’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 16 of the 16 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 72 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 16 most recent posts we hold, published 21 July 2026 to 6 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
12
across the posts below
Posts paid on
9
of 16 we hold a reading for · 56%
Most on one post
2
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @skazkyizkarmashka. 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 16 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 21 July 2026 to 6 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.
Вы покупаете те самые милые карточки «Злость», «Грусть», «Страх» для ребёнка. Вы водите его на кружки по эмоциональному интеллекту. Вы читаете ему сказки перед сном, чтобы он вырос цельным.
А сами вы когда в последний раз разговаривали со своей злостью?
Не подавляли её, не заедали шоколадкой, не убегали в работу, а именно посидели с ней?
Мне знаком этот сценарий. Вы — «хорошая мать». Вы должны держать удар. Но ког…
Листаете ленту, видите чужие успехи — и внутри что-то ёкает.
«А почему у них так, а у меня нет?»
Мы не будем говорить, что сравнивать себя с другими — плохо.
Но давайте честно: работает ли это в вашей конкретной жизни? Среди ваших задач, вашего ритма и ваших обстоятельств?
⬇️
В новом выпуске мы не читаем нотации.
— что мы ищем, когда смотрим на других;
— почему иногда так хочется быть «не хуже»;
— и что меняется,…
Сказка про Зайчонка и Куницу. История про принятие себя и опору за исходные качества, все про преумножение сильных сторон и работы со слабыми, но в любом случае сказка учит опираться на свой опыт роста и рефлексии.
В чудесное время живем, любую свою идею можешь реализовать с помощью простых инструментов. Кто знает, может в скором времени я дойду до настоящих короткометражных анимационных фильмов?) 🍿🍿🍿
Много букв не будет, потому что про стыд писала и, вообще, это меганеприятная история от которой хочется сжаться и провалиться сквозь землю. Вот и заяц сжимался, вот и проваливался... Вот и не приятненько на физическом уровне...
Очень надеюсь, что у наших детей нет таких приколов и закрыты базовые потребности и даже не возникнет вопросов, достоин он или нет, "тварь ли я дрожащая".
Признаюсь честно, я испытываю дики…
Новый выпуск уже на ямузыке
Подписывайтесь, чтобы не пропустить новые выпуски и чтобы поддержать меня.
Ваша Volga T
❤2🔥2
Showing the 12 most recent of 16 posts we hold for @skazkyizkarmashka. 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.
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 9 October 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Volga T/ Спектакли и сказки про эмоции” (@skazkyizkarmashka), 355 subscribers as measured 9 October 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/skazkyizkarmashka.
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.
