Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram

Channel

breeze

@soft_breeze04

On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry

99subscribers

-1 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1002088290656
TypeChannel
Username@soft_breeze04
CreatedBetween 1 November 2023 and 31 May 2024— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded9 August 2026
Last confirmed live15 August 2026
Measurements held3
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 15 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/soft_breeze04

Growth

9910099.57 August 2026 — 100 subscribers9 August 2026 — 100 subscribers15 August 2026 — 99 subscribers7 August 202615 August 2026
3 measurements spanning 7 days, net -1. 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 99–100 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
15 Aug 2026, 03:1599-1
9 Aug 2026, 10:47100no change
7 Aug 2026, 19:08100first reading

Engagement

10 posts held, back to 12 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 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
44.3%
avg views ÷ 99 subscribers
Avg views / post
43.9
8 posts measured
Reaction rate
25.2%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
8
of 10 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 7 of 8 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 7 August 2026
Posts held10 (12 July 20267 August 2026)
Views total351
Reactions total79
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken9 Aug 2026, 10:47 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.

Reaction mix

121 reactions across 9 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 41.3% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
🔥5041.3%
3428.1%
❤‍🔥129.92%
🥰119.09%
💯86.61%
😁64.96%

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 9 of the 10 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 121reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 10 most recent posts we hold, published 12 July 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.

Recent posts

7 Aug 2026, 20:05 UTC22 views5 reactionsread 9 August 2026

Да, мне согласовали. Визжу.

🔥5

7 Aug 2026, 20:00 UTC23 views11 reactionsread 9 August 2026
Photo

Помешанная на днд снова вернулась. Я отправила на согласование мастеру новый прикид своего персонажа. Кажется, мне согласовали 🍪 Очень на это надеюсь.

🔥11

1 Aug 2026, 20:31 UTC41 views12 reactionsread 9 August 2026
Forwarded from @countdown_to_harvestPhoto

Дособирала. 🙂

❤‍🔥75

1 Aug 2026, 18:19 UTC36 views16 reactionsread 9 August 2026
Forwarded from @countdown_to_harvestPhoto

То, что персонаж для ваншота, не повод не сделать ему свои странички. 🥺 А ещё Ветерок и Горыныч мне нарисовали моего колдуна ебучего.

🥰74🔥4❤‍🔥1

28 Jul 2026, 06:15 UTC56 views8 reactionsread 9 August 2026

Если что, я не пропала. Просто начала полноценку, которую ну прям надо закончить в срок. Попробую накидывать какие-то наброски в процессе, но не гарантирую. Возможно, силы будут и на то, и на другое, когда пройдет простуда.

8

16 Jul 2026, 21:10 UTC94 views24 reactionsread 9 August 2026

Нас 100. Даже 101. Невероятно. Спасибо большое, мои вы хорошие 🥰

🔥10💯8😁6

14 Jul 2026, 13:58 UTC233 views24 reactionsread 9 August 2026
Photo

Внезапно сегодня #portfolioday И у меня даже есть что-то свежее, чтобы поучаствовать. Вау.

🔥137🥰4

12 Jul 2026, 20:30 UTC179 views18 reactionsread 9 August 2026
Photo

И да прощу себя я, и да простит меня моя подружаня за то, что я не сделала им кожу канонично темной. Клянусь, я просто в моменте не учла особенности слоев и… ну вот. Держу в курсе, мелкого после его слов отправят мыть посуду за всем отрядом. Потому что кое-кто по имени Риз, как он сам считает (и правильно), не имеет права довести-таки дело до конца.

7🔥7❤‍🔥4

Showing the 10 most recent of 10 posts we hold for @soft_breeze04. 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 — 331,948 of 1,480,688entries 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

Republished by

Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.

Republishes

Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.

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 1 registered channel — 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.

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

“breeze” (@soft_breeze04), 99 subscribers as measured 15 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/soft_breeze04.

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.