4 measurements spanning 7 days, net -11. 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 6,211–6,226 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
12 Aug 2026, 18:35
6,213
-8
9 Aug 2026, 08:50
6,221
-2
6 Aug 2026, 15:07
6,223
-1
6 Aug 2026, 03:48
6,224
first reading
Engagement
20 posts held, back to 13 January 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 9 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
19.9%
avg views ÷ 6,213 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,240
3 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.80%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
3
of 20 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 10 August 2026
Posts held
20 (13 January 2026 – 10 August 2026)
Views total
3,718
Reactions total
67
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Aug 2026, 03:25 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
450 reactions across 19 posts, in 11 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 33.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
🔥
150
33.3%
❤
140
31.1%
👍
122
27.1%
👎
17
3.78%
🤔
7
1.56%
🥱
4
0.889%
👾
3
0.667%
🦄
3
0.667%
✍
2
0.444%
💯
1
0.222%
🤯
1
0.222%
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 20 of the 20 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 533reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 13 January 2026 to 10 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
11
across the posts below
Posts paid on
10
of 20 we hold a reading for · 50%
Most on one post
2
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @thisisdata. 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 20 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 13 January 2026 to 10 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.
Advertising
Ad load
5.00%
1 of 20 posts carry an ad marker
Regulatory tokens
1
posts carrying an erid · 1 distinct token
Median views · ads
698
over 1 measured post
Median views · rest
2,790
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. The sample on one side is under five posts, which is too thin to compare. The two figures are shown side by side with the count behind each, and deliberately not divided into a headline like “ads get x% fewer views” — an arithmetic that is easy to print and, at this sample size, means nothing.
Advertising tokens recorded on this entry
erid
Posts
First seen
Last seen
2VtzquZf5
1
10 August 2026
10 August 2026
A token repeated across several posts is one advertising contract placed more than once, which is what the identifier is for. The strings are reproduced exactly as they appeared in the post or in its click-through URL and are not validated against any registry — we record the marker a channel published, and whether it resolves to a real contract is a question for the register that issued it.
Measured over the 20 most recent posts we hold, published 13 January 2026 to 10 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.
Lakehouse для аналитиков и инженеров данных
Приглашаем изучить популярный подход построения хранилищ данных Data Lakehouse c разделенным Compute и Storage на основе Iceberg и Trino.
В программе курса:
• Современная архитектура аналитических систем от DWH и Data Lake до Lakehouse с разделением Compute и Storage на базе Apache Iceberg и Trino.
• Iceberg: управление файлами, снимками, каталогами, схемами изменений и о…
На русском языке о стратегии построения аналитической команды нет почти ничего. Буквально несколько статей, одна из которых моя. Тем ценнее handbook, продолжающий эту тему и превращающий разрозненные наблюдения в пошаговую систему.
📚 From Data to Insights. The strategy of a Data Analytics Team
John Mackay
Джон начинал инженером данных, вырос до руководителя аналитики в крупном европейском банке, а сейчас управляет …
Как написать стратегию аналитики и зачем она нужна?
Ура, я наконец-то закончил эту статью! Писал ее долго, потому что хотел сделать по-настоящему крутой гайд, в который вложил много сил. И теперь с радостью делюсь с вами.
Эта статья для тех, кто недавно стал тимлидом или хедом аналитики и чувствует, что пора выйти из режима «просто делаем задачи» и начать думать системно.
Перед тем, как ее опубликовать, я искал по…
Мои друзья из команд продуктовой аналитики Т-Шопинга и Т-Бизнеса проводят Weekend Offer
4-5 июля вы сможете пройти все этапы, познакомиться с командами и задать вопросы будущим коллегам. Формат - полностью онлайн, поэтому присоединиться можно из любого города России.
Сейчас ищут аналитиков с опытом от года: мидлов, сеньоров и начинающих лидов. В Т-Банке продуктовые аналитики работают вместе с командами с самого ста…
Друзья, это финальный пост про пирамиду метрик.
Я довольно много писал про метрики и разные фреймворки, и к пирамиде мы возвращались не раз. Но с последним слоем я немного подзатянул - исправляюсь 🙂
На последнем уровне - интерфейс продукта и маркетинг - находятся самые прикладные метрики. Те, с которыми команды работают каждый день и которые напрямую отражают поведение пользователей.
Этот слой отвечает на базовые …
Эффективные встречи один на один - существуют ли они?
Я терпеть не могу встречи ради встреч. Обычно это просто сжигание времени. Но есть один формат, в который я по-настоящему верю 🙏
Встречи один на один - не просто регулярный разговор сотрудника с начальником, а один из главных инструментов управления. К сожалению, многие относятся к ним как к простой формальности и проводят их «для галочки».
Для меня 1-1 - это с…
Как аналитику оптимизировать свои запросы?
Ранее я рассказывал, почему оконные функции могут тормозить, и дал 4 совета по оптимизации. Но если ты действительно хочешь ускорить свои запросы, то начинать нужно с анализа плана выполнения.
Знакомьтесь - EXPLAIN
Команда простая и очевидная, но почему-то ею мало кто пользуется. Может, потому что хочется быстрее решить задачу, а не копаться в том, как база данных обрабат…
Как учатся модели машинного обучения?
Ранее я написал небольшую статью про историю ML, а сегодня хочу развить тему дальше.
Речь пойдет о моделях, которые учатся, минимизируя функцию потерь градиентными методами. У других алгоритмов (например, деревья) свои механизмы, но они тоже оптимизируют критерий качества. Есть и алгоритмы, которые вообще не проходят этап обучения - например, kNN просто хранит обучающие данные …
Почему оконные функции могут тормозить запрос?
Я написал уже целую серию постов про оконки (раз, два, три) и там все выглядело красиво - добавил OVER() и получил профит. Но в комментах справедливо подметили, что оконные функции - это часто один из самых тяжелых видов запросов, который сильно жрет ресурсы.
Главный виновник тут обычно не сама функция, а сортировка. Сортировать много строк - дорогая операция на больши…
В АБ-тестах самая частая ошибка не расчет p-value, а неправильный выбор статистического теста.
▪️Одна выборка или две?
▪️Если две - зависимые или независимые?
▪️Сравниваем средние или пропорции?
▪️Есть ли выбросы?
▪️Насколько однородны группы?
От этого зависит правильность ваших выводов.
Я сделал простую схему-шпаргалку по выбору тестов. Минимальный старт, чтобы не выбирать метод наугад.
Но важно понимать, что сх…
Как перестать хвататься за все сразу
Часто вижу людей, которых на работе заваливает проектами. Десятки писем и чатов, параллельные инициативы, стратегические задачи вперемешку с операционкой. В итоге расфокус и постоянное ощущение, что ты что-то не успеваешь 😕
Если вы себя узнали, хочется кинуть вам спасательный круг.
Я давно использую приоритизацию Must - Should - Nice to Have. Это упрощенная версия метода MoSCoW…
Решил попробовать написать серию постов про машинное обучение.
Но так как люблю копать глубоко, начать захотелось с истории - понять, откуда вообще все это выросло и почему мы оказались именно в текущей точке. Так сказать, пройтись по основным вехам.
В какой-то момент стало понятно, что это уже не пост для Telegram. Текст разросся, плюс захотелось добавить фоток и немного контекста.
➡️ Поэтому вынес его в блог.
П…
🔥20🥱3
Showing the 12 most recent of 20 posts we hold for @thisisdata. 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.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 893,669 of 1,169,250entries 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 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.
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 12 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“This is Data” (@thisisdata), 6,213 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/thisisdata.
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.
