Channel
@srach_hate_cf
On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
1,855subscribers
+49 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 1,000–3,162.
| Telegram ID | -1003252492656 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @srach_hate_cf |
| Created | Between 1 October 2025 and 31 January 2026— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 6 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/srach_hate_cf |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 23:35 | 1,855 | +23 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 05:34 | 1,832 | +16 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 21:12 | 1,816 | +10 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 12:05 | 1,806 | first reading |
36 posts held, back to 5 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 2 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
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 27 of 36 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 7 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 36 (5 August 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 4,722 |
| Reactions total | 285 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 7 Aug 2026, 17:28 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.
Measured directly from 1 video 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.
285 reactions across 27 posts, in 21 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 26.3% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 75 | 26.3% | |
| custom 5285157424678859944 | 68 | 23.9% | |
| 👎 | 25 | 8.77% | |
| custom 5285436464409115232 | 21 | 7.37% | |
| 😢 | 16 | 5.61% | |
| 🍓 | 13 | 4.56% | |
| 👍 | 12 | 4.21% | |
| 🥰 | 11 | 3.86% | |
| 🤡 | 10 | 3.51% | |
| 🔥 | 8 | 2.81% | |
| 💋 | 7 | 2.46% | |
| 👀 | 3 | 1.05% | |
| 🤝 | 3 | 1.05% | |
| 🤣 | 3 | 1.05% | |
| 💘 | 2 | 0.702% | |
| 💩 | 2 | 0.702% | |
| 🤩 | 2 | 0.702% | |
| 🕊 | 1 | 0.351% | |
| 😍 | 1 | 0.351% | |
| 🤔 | 1 | 0.351% | |
| 1 further kind | 1 | 0.351% |
Custom emoji. 2 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 areTelegram’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 27 of the 36 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 285reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 36 most recent posts we hold, published 5 August 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.
TW. НСФВ НА 3-4 СКРИНЕ. извините блять, я понимаю если бы там была ужасная рисовка и блевотное деформированное тело, но доебаться до фетиша когда там даже ХЕШТЕГИ о нем стоят это очень странно. канал не называется "онли миссионерская без фетишей" И СВКА ЭТО БУКВАЛЬНО ПЛАТНЫЙ ФУЛЛ С ПАТРИОНА, ЧИТАЙ НАХУЙ ХЕШТЕГИ, ЧИТАЙ, ЧИТАЙ, ЧИТАЙ. #тейк @srachhatebot
❤3💋2
Signed Срачкф
РЕЗУЛЬТАТ ИНЦЕСТА
🥰5❤1🕊1
Signed ♡̶ 𝓼𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑟
трансы все сдохнут нахуй моя подруга встречается по инету с ебаным трансом это клиника ? #тейк @srachhatebot
custom 528515742467885994417custom 52854364644091152325❤1🤬1
Signed Срачкф
накипело, ребят, накипелооооо про отдельный пост с модерацией тейков, тобишь причины, по которым может быть отклонён тейк. не буду говорить, в каком именно кф🙏😂 сука, зачем эта вся писанина существует, если на самом деле тейк игнорируется по причине большого их потока от множества людей? причём, даже учитывая эту писанину, публикуется всякая рейджбайт залупа или что-то хохмы ради + 100500 однотипных тейков об одном и…
🍓1
Signed Срачкф
меня заебало то как сейчас выглядит большинство адоптов. почему блять люди рисуют максимально ЖИДЕЙШИЕ пустые дизайны в которых НОЛЬ крупных деталей и нет никакой изюминки, за то куча ебаных бинтов пластырей заколок таблеток бантиков. блять начните уже добавлять в дизайны крупные детали что бы ваша хуйня выглядела интересно а не просто тенши/каваиикей/гяру деваха которая АБСОЛЮТНО НИЧЕМ не запоминается и ее дизайн мо…
❤2💘1🤝1
Signed Срачкф
Инцест это норма, особенно с согласия обоих людей. Человек не выбирает в кого влюбляться, это такая же любовь, просто захейченная ни за что. Да, дети рождаются нездоровыми, но в че проблема взять из детдома?. Изначально это был людской способ выживания, кстати, а так же инцест практиковался в традициях бракосочетания фараонов и инков (практически все они женились на своих сёстрах) и правителей некоторых других (Саса…
custom 52854364644091152324custom 52851574246788599443❤2💋2🥰1😍1
Signed Срачкф
➖ 𝐡𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐤𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐢 𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟 🔠вас проблемы с социализацией?😰 🔠золированы от общества❔ 🤩 🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩🤩 🎇 наша конфа предоставит вам возможность найти знакомства с другими хикками 🤩 🔮 🗒🗒 welcome 🗒 🤩
Signed ♡̶ 𝓼𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑜𝑟
тфем лесбиянка заебала всем ПОХУЙ уже на это нет она продолжает это уже блять на уровне окак пошла нахуй просто ПОШЛА НА #тейк @srachhatebot
👎9custom 52851574246788599445❤3💩2
Signed Срачкф
я ненавиду ебучего скотта и вообще весь фандом фнафа потому что как оказалось в течении сука 12ти лет мы все дружно верили в какую-то поеботу блять
custom 52851574246788599447❤2🍓2👍1
Signed Сміхунець 🪽 °♱⋆.ೃ࿔*:･
Призрак оперы (книга гандона лижу и адаптации схожие с ней (фильм 1925, игра от мазм)) гойслоп для некрофилов #тейк @srachhatebot
custom 52854364644091152322👍1
Signed Срачкф
Сука я не понимаю как людям не жарко?!?!? Я в огромном удивление. На улице +30, а девушка идёт в черной кофте и черных штанах,как???? Нет серьезно,на улице духота ужасная,я искренне не понимаю Потом,когда уже было +35, вижу похожую картину Вам действительно не жарко,как это блять я не понимаю объясните #тейк @srachhatebot
❤2👍1
Signed Срачкф
Я ненавижу ВСЕХ . Я ненавижу мужчин, ненавижу женщин, ненавижу трансов, небинаров, агендеров и прочую хуету ...Могла бы сказать я. На самом деле, мы ненавидем не пол, гендер и прочую бурмалдень. Мы не любим конкретных особей. Но почему-то сразу начинаем цепляться за очевидные признаки. И ведь действительно, тяжело определять приятных нам людей от невыносимых. Поэтому мы предпочитаем ненавидеть из-за того, что вообще…
🥰5👍2🍓1
Signed Срачкф
Showing the 12 most recent of 36 posts we hold for @srach_hate_cf. 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 — 101,390 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.
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.
Named by 20 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.
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.
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.
“💥srach&hate🆘 confession” (@srach_hate_cf), 1,855 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/srach_hate_cf.
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.