9 measurements spanning 7 days, net +346. 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 17,343–17,793 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
13 Aug 2026, 05:48
17,741
+41
12 Aug 2026, 09:06
17,700
+49
11 Aug 2026, 06:24
17,651
+52
10 Aug 2026, 07:02
17,599
+40
9 Aug 2026, 04:11
17,559
+38
8 Aug 2026, 04:12
17,521
+91
7 Aug 2026, 02:27
17,430
+35
6 Aug 2026, 04:15
17,395
no change
6 Aug 2026, 04:08
17,395
first reading
Engagement
26 posts held, back to 4 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 20 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
10.8%
avg views ÷ 17,741 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,920
26 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.07%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
26
of 26 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 25 of 26 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 12 August 2026
Posts held
26 (4 August 2026 – 12 August 2026)
Views total
49,835
Reactions total
520
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
13 Aug 2026, 00:25 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
439 reactions across 21 posts, in 15 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 27.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
😁
120
27.3%
💊
111
25.3%
❤
63
14.4%
🤡
60
13.7%
👍
56
12.8%
🥱
7
1.59%
🍾
4
0.911%
🔥
4
0.911%
🤯
4
0.911%
🌭
3
0.683%
🎄
2
0.456%
🤩
2
0.456%
👻
1
0.228%
💘
1
0.228%
🤓
1
0.228%
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 25 of the 26 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 520reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 26 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 12 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.
Advertising
Ad load
26.9%
7 of 26 posts carry an ad marker
Regulatory tokens
0
none — marked by hashtag only
Median views · ads
703
over 7 measured posts
Median views · rest
1,890
over 19 measured posts
An ad marker, not a judgement about a post. A post is counted here because it carries one of two explicit markings: an erid token, which Russian law has required on paid placements since 2022 and which is issued against a specific advertising contract, or a #реклама / #ad hashtag in the body, which is the channel declaring it itself. The first is documentary; the second is a self-declaration and is weaker. No classifier reads the text and decides — nothing on this site guesses that a post is an advertisement.
This is a floor, and it can only ever be a floor.A channel that runs paid placements without marking them produces no marker for us to count, and an unmarked ad is indistinguishable from an ordinary post on the public surface. The ad load above therefore means “the share of posts that declared themselves”, never “the share of posts that were paid for”. A low figure is not evidence of a channel that runs few ads.
Both figures are medians, and no ratio between them is published. Each is a view reading that actually occurred on a post, picked by percentile_disc rather than averaged, so one viral post cannot move it and no interpolated value is invented between two readings. They are printed side by side with the count behind each rather than as a ratio: an ad and an ordinary post are not otherwise matched — for topic, for length, for hour of day — so the gap between them is a description of two groups and not the effect of one being an ad.
Measured over the 26 most recent posts we hold, published 4 August 2026 to 12 August 2026. Views are the latest single reading held for each post, and any reading at or above 1,000 is rounded by Telegram to three significant figures.
Showing the 12 most recent of 26 posts we hold for @sstrojan. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@sstrojan edited 1 post after it first published — the same permalink now carries different wording than the one this register originally read, caught because our own crawl held a copy of the earlier text.
An edit is not deception. Typo fixes, price updates and corrections look exactly like this too — this register can tell you the wording changed and when, not why. How this is measured.
First edit seen
12 August 2026
Most recent edit
12 August 2026
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 36,018 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
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
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 12 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.
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 13 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“小众机场测评” (@sstrojan), 17,741 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/sstrojan.
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.
