Other / unclassifiable — 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 8 August 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.
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 and reactions moved apart
On 23 of the 260 posts we watched over 30 days, the view counter climbed while the reaction counter stayed where it was — by more than this channel’s own reactions-per-view rate can account for. That rate, measured on this entry, is 0.0013 reactions per view.
Each interval, as we read it — views and reactions before and after
Expected is the view gain multiplied by this channel’s own prior reactions-per-view rate over the same post — not a corpus average, so a channel whose audience never reacts is compared only against itself. Every interval is credited in the direction that makes the observation harder to record, never easier: t.me renders views and reactions to three significant figures above ~1,000, so a raw delta can be a rendering step. Every delta below is at least 4 x the coarser reading's step, the view gain is discounted by a full step and the reaction gain credited with one. Measured by tgregister velocity.py (our own t.me/s/ readings).
What this does and does not say. It says the two counters moved apart, by more than rounding and more than this channel’s own history predicts. It asserts no cause. Views arriving from outside Telegram, an embedded or forwarded copy of the post, and a burst of readers who simply do not react all produce this shape. This detector has recorded very few observations across the whole register, and its precision has not been measured; treat it as an anomaly worth looking at, not as a finding.
Recorded under the key view_reaction_decoupling, last confirmed 27 September 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
68 measurements spanning 53 days, net +34,038. 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 2,479,765–2,541,722 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded, most recent 20 of 68
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
27 Sept 2026, 23:58
2,520,952
-6,052
17 Sept 2026, 18:58
2,527,004
-679
16 Sept 2026, 06:16
2,527,683
-259
15 Sept 2026, 13:16
2,527,942
-488
14 Sept 2026, 12:38
2,528,430
-328
14 Sept 2026, 00:18
2,528,758
-563
12 Sept 2026, 23:40
2,529,321
-303
12 Sept 2026, 10:16
2,529,624
-859
10 Sept 2026, 22:37
2,530,483
-188
10 Sept 2026, 05:39
2,530,671
-209
7 Sept 2026, 23:56
2,530,880
-458
6 Sept 2026, 22:16
2,531,338
-710
5 Sept 2026, 00:21
2,532,048
+1,018
4 Sept 2026, 11:57
2,531,030
+1,661
3 Sept 2026, 09:07
2,529,369
-731
3 Sept 2026, 00:12
2,530,100
+1,959
2 Sept 2026, 04:25
2,528,141
-28
1 Sept 2026, 19:05
2,528,169
-1,339
1 Sept 2026, 05:17
2,529,508
-1,047
31 Aug 2026, 15:42
2,530,555
first reading
Engagement
32,478 posts held, back to 3 September 2016 — the reader has reached the start of this channel’s public history, so this is the full archive Telegram still exposes. Read across 5,621 pages of Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
8.88%
avg views ÷ 2,520,952 subscribers
Avg views / post
224,000
299 posts measured
Reaction rate
0.135%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
299
of 32,478 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
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 27 September 2026
Posts held
32,478 (3 September 2016 – 27 September 2026)
Views total
66,966,400
Reactions total
90,474
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
28 Sept 2026, 00:00 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.
View velocity
How fast this channel’s own posts pick up views, from re-reading them repeatedly in the hours and days after they were published rather than the single reading most entries on this register get. Coverage is early and only a small minority of channels hold it at all — a gap in this section means the post has not been re-read again yet, not that nothing happened.
Computed from 260 of this channel’s own posts over the last 30 days (8 of the 24-hour readings behind this are interpolated, not measured directly): across 253 of this channel’s own posts with a clear reading, a typical one reaches half of its last-observed view count within 12 hours of being posted; a typical post has already reached 15.4% of its 24-hour view count within the first hour, and 58.9% within the first six; the median 24-hour reach across those posts is 156,000 views — 6.19% of this channel’s own subscriber count (90th percentile 174,800).
8 most recently posted, with a view-velocity reading
Curve is every standard checkpoint we hold a reading for (+1h, +3h, +6h, +12h, +24h, +48h, +7d after posting) — measured where a real reading landed close enough to that age, interpolated where it did not but readings on both sides let one be worked out between them. Nothing is ever extrapolated past the last real reading. Latest reading is the newest view and reaction count we hold for the post, side by side, so a gap between how views and reactions moved is visible without following it into the Observations section above. 24h reach is that one checkpoint on its own, labelled the same way. Half of last-observed views is the age at which a post’s view count crossed half of the highest figure we have read for it so far — an upper bound when the very first reading was already past half (we cannot see the actual crossing), and biased low while the post is still climbing, since “half of final” is dividing by a number that has not finished growing yet. Both caveats are printed inline wherever they apply, never silently dropped.
Reaction mix
177,823 reactions across 581 posts, in 1 kind.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
177,823
100.0%
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 1,000 of the 1,000 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 308,619 reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 1,000 most recent posts we hold (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 23 June 2026 to 27 September 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
85
across the posts below
Posts paid on
61
of 1,000 we hold a reading for · 6%
Most on one post
4
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @telmtproto. 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 1,000 most recent posts we hold for this entry (the sample is capped at 1,000), published 23 June 2026 to 27 September 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.
Showing the 12 most recent of 32,478 posts we hold for @telmtproto. 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.
Posts edited after publishing
@telmtproto edited 2 posts 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
19 September 2026
Most recent edit
20 September 2026
Forward network
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 46 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. The 24 listed below are the most frequent namers; the rest are counted above but not each listed.
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.
Handles this channel named that no longer answer
Dead references
4
handles named in this channel’s posts, vacant today
Evidenced gone
0
we ourselves saw one of these resolve, at some point
Never seen alive
4
vacant every time we have ever looked
@telmtproto named 4 handles that resolve to nothing today. That is a fact about the reference, not necessarily a fact about the handle’s history — see the two groups below.
Most of these may never have existed as a live channel at all. A handle a channel names can be a typo, an aspirational name nobody registered, or a channel that was already gone before this one ever mentioned it. Unless a row below is marked evidenced, all we know is that it references a handle that is not a live channel today — not that anything “died”. How this is measured.
Never seen alive
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
@webproxy named in 4 posts, 9 September 2026 – 20 September 2026
@telmtproxy named in 2 posts, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@telmtprot named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
@temtpoto named in 1 post, 8 August 2026 – 8 August 2026
Channels Telegram recommends alongside this one
Telegram’s own answer, not this register’s. When this register asks Telegram’s API what is similar to this channel, this is the list it returns, in the exact order Telegram returns it — never re-sorted by subscribers or by anything else this register measures. The relationship, and the order, are Telegram’s; we record them and date them, and make no claim of our own about which of these channels actually resemble this one.
Read from Telegram’s recommendation API, most recently 7 August 2026. Telegram holds a list like this for a small and growing share of the register — how this is measured, and why most channel pages show nothing here.
Appears in Telegram’s recommendations for other channels
The reverse of the list above, and a different kind of signal. This does not require this channel to have ever been asked about directly — each row below is a channel we DID ask Telegram about, whose Telegram-generated list happened to include this one. A channel can appear here with an empty list above it, because being named by someone else’s query is independent of having been queried itself.
GlypeX | MTProxy @GlypeX · 29,820 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 61 here — alongside 60 others — read 8 September 2026
Proxy MTProto | پروکسی @tgMTProto · 114,795 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 46 here — alongside 45 others — read 14 August 2026
Proxy MTProto @proxymtproto · 11,940,791 Telegram ranks this channel #1 of 81 here — alongside 80 others — read 7 August 2026
Proxy Active |پروکسی فعال @proxy_active · 67,242 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 57 here — alongside 56 others — read 20 August 2026
Proxy MTProto | پروکسی @NoteProxy · 144,576 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 88 here — alongside 87 others — read 13 August 2026
Proxy MTProto | پروکسی @Chrome_Proxy · 496,674 Telegram ranks this channel #2 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 9 August 2026
FɪʀᴇFᴏx ᴘʀᴏxʏ @Ferifox_proxy · 35,131 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 68 here — alongside 67 others — read 2 September 2026
Proxy MTProto @internetproxy · 36,468 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 65 here — alongside 64 others — read 1 September 2026
Proxifier | Proxy mtproto @Proxy_fier · 57,484 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 24 August 2026
MTProto Proxies @MPrxy · 58,776 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 72 here — alongside 71 others — read 23 August 2026
Outline VPN Official @OutlineVpnOfficial · 219,863 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 55 here — alongside 54 others — read 11 August 2026
Proxy MTProto @ProxyMTProto_tel · 1,238,687 Telegram ranks this channel #3 of 83 here — alongside 82 others — read 8 August 2026
پروکسی | Proxy MTProto @mtp_roto · 1,630,904 Telegram ranks this channel #5 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 8 August 2026
Proxy MTProto @old_proxy · 43,479 Telegram ranks this channel #6 of 68 here — alongside 67 others — read 28 August 2026
Proxy MTProto @nord_mtproxy · 39,809 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 71 here — alongside 70 others — read 30 August 2026
📡 MIZAN | میزان پروکسی 📲 @mizanproxy · 159,301 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 85 here — alongside 84 others — read 12 August 2026
MineProxy | ماین پروکسی @mineproxy · 282,503 Telegram ranks this channel #7 of 89 here — alongside 88 others — read 10 August 2026
Proxy MTProto @turbo_mtproxy · 67,545 Telegram ranks this channel #8 of 76 here — alongside 75 others — read 20 August 2026
v2Line Proxy @v2Line · 47,984 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 41 here — alongside 40 others — read 26 August 2026
King Proxy | پروکسی @kingporoxy · 145,592 Telegram ranks this channel #9 of 61 here — alongside 60 others — read 13 August 2026
MTP(P)roto Proxies ™ | کانال پروکسی @mtpprotoproxies · 39,066 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 58 here — alongside 57 others — read 30 August 2026
Red Vpn 🔴 اخبار @iRedVpn · 47,835 Telegram ranks this channel #13 of 57 here — alongside 56 others — read 26 August 2026
Crypto Oxygen @CryptoOxygen · 30,558 Telegram ranks this channel #14 of 56 here — alongside 55 others — read 6 September 2026
My Proxy | مای پروکسی @Myporoxy · 4,491,818 Telegram ranks this channel #15 of 77 here — alongside 76 others — read 7 August 2026
This channel appears in 368 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total, of which the 24 where it ranks highest are shown above. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
Domains linked from posts
8 domains this channel’s own posts have linked to, measured by scanning the post bodies themselves — not the channel’s description, which is the separate Declared links section below when this entry has one. Appearing here is not a claim about who runs the linked site or why the channel linked to it; an advertisement, a news citation and a malicious link all leave the same kind of row.
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 27 September 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Proxy MTProto | پروکسی” (@telmtproto), 2,520,952 subscribers as measured 27 September 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/telmtproto.
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.
