6 measurements spanning 10 days, net -43. 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 5,105–5,160 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
16 Aug 2026, 22:34
5,111
-21
14 Aug 2026, 01:15
5,132
-11
10 Aug 2026, 18:05
5,143
-10
8 Aug 2026, 03:17
5,153
-1
7 Aug 2026, 09:30
5,154
no change
7 Aug 2026, 09:18
5,154
first reading
Engagement
22 posts held, back to 6 June 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 8 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
21.7%
avg views ÷ 5,111 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,110
9 posts measured
Reaction rate
2.31%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
9
of 22 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 9 August 2026
Posts held
22 (6 June 2026 – 9 August 2026)
Views total
9,995
Reactions total
231
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
12 Aug 2026, 04:44 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
824 reactions across 22 posts, in 12 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 53.4% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
440
53.4%
❤🔥
172
20.9%
🔥
134
16.3%
👍
27
3.28%
🏆
14
1.70%
💯
14
1.70%
😁
6
0.728%
🙏
5
0.607%
🤝
5
0.607%
👏
4
0.485%
👎
2
0.243%
🤗
1
0.121%
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 22 of the 22 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 824reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 22 most recent posts we hold, published 6 June 2026 to 9 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
20
across the posts below
Posts paid on
9
of 22 we hold a reading for · 41%
Most on one post
7
single highest reading
A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @truestepanov. 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 22 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 6 June 2026 to 9 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.
Небольшая афиша:
19 сентября стартует 19-ый поток нашей флагманской программы «Астронавты🚀»
Сам не заметил, как 6 лет пролетело😄
Есть вероятность, что 20-ый поток будет уже только через год осенью 2027-го года, так что если слышали отнас, давно хотели пройти и всё как-то было не до этого, то возможно сейчас то самое время😉
Также 19 сентября стартует программа для тех, кому интересно поработать с своими подавленым…
Точка опоры.
Последние годы многих из нас научили одной вещи: всегда может случиться что-то, что может выбить почву из-под ног.
Изменения в стране.
Экономический кризис. Потеря привычной стабильности. Неопределённость с будущим.
И самое сложное в такие моменты — даже не сами внешние события.
Самое сложное — что внутри человека начинает править его величество хаос.
Мы начинаем:
— принимать решения из страха
— те…
Если откликается, то очередные 50 клубных карт на 2027-ой год по цене 129.000 руб уже в продаже.
Важно: если вы не проходили программу «Астронавты», то вам надо успеть попасть в сентябрьский поток, иначе мы не сможем допустить вас до клубных мероприятий🙏
Как обычно, по всем вопросам обращайтесь в клиентский сервис — аккаунт в первом комментарии❤️
Большинство людей терпят неудачи в своих начинаниях не потому, что они не знают, что делать.
Хотя и это бывает.
Но чаще проблема в другом:
Они пытаются изменить внешний контур жизни, не изменив внутренний.
Хотят:
— новый уровень дохода, но остаются с прежним отношением к риску;
— новый уровень бизнеса, но продолжают принимать решения как специалист;
— новые отношения, но сохраняют старые сценарии;
— новое качест…
Про будущее проекта (Часть 1)
Знания сами по себе слишком редко становятся новым образом жизни.
Следующим этапом для нас как для проекта становится не разработка еще более качественных программ (хотя и этим тоже мы продолжим заниматься), а
создание сред и пространств, внутри которых человеку становится проще меняться.
Где обучение — это только одна из составляющих.
Где рядом есть свои — люди, говорящие на одном я…
Чем больше я думаю над темой разрыва между тем, что человек знает, и тем, как он живет, тем сильнее прихожу к одному выводу:
Похоже, этот разрыв невозможно (или по крайней мере очень сложно) сократить в одиночку.
Можно бесконечно читать книги, проходить программы, вдохновляться и искренне хотеть изменений. Но если среда, в которой ты живешь, продолжает воспроизводить старый образ жизни, то через какое-то время имен…
Трагедия умных людей.
Замечали ли вы, что уровень качества жизни большинства действительно умных людей, очень часто оказывается ниже уровня их знаний?
Если посмотреть вокруг (или даже в зеркало😅), то становится очевидно, что огромное количество мягко скажем неглупых людей прекрасно знают, как нужно жить.
Мы знаем, что стоит раньше ложиться спать и высыпаться, вместо думскроллинга на ночь. Что важно заниматься спор…
Колея привычной жизни
Каждое утро мы просыпаемся внутри уже сложившейся жизни. У нас есть то или иное расписание, обязательства, отношения, окружение, способы справляться с напряжением, привычные решения и маршруты, по которым мы ходим годами, если не десятилетями.
И вся эта конструкция ежедневно возвращает нас в прежнюю версию себя.
Поэтому одного намерения жить иначе почти всегда недостаточно. Да, мы можем повер…
Мы слишком легко говорим:
«Я знаю!»
На мой взгляд, настоящее знание и понимание обретается там, где меняется жизнь. До этого момента у нас есть лишь догадки и некие теории, которые еще не прошли проверку реальностью. Мы не знаем, как на самом деле это сработает и сработает ли?
«Гладко было на бумаге, да наткнулись на овраги…»
Почему одним людям удается превращать новую информацию в новую жизнь, а другим — нет?
З…
🔥19❤12🏆7👍1
Signed Andrey Stepanov
Showing the 12 most recent of 22 posts we hold for @truestepanov. 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 — 291,179 of 1,550,164entries 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.
Mentions
Named by 2 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.
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.
Оскар Хартманн @Oskar_Hartmann · 93,958 Telegram ranks this channel #10 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 16 August 2026
Михаил Гребенюк @grebenukm · 262,817 Telegram ranks this channel #17 of 95 here — alongside 94 others — read 10 August 2026
Маргулан Сейсембай @MargulanSeissembai · 211,342 Telegram ranks this channel #81 of 96 here — alongside 95 others — read 11 August 2026
This channel appears in 3 seed channels' Telegram-generated recommendation lists in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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 16 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“Андрей Степанов” (@truestepanov), 5,111 subscribers as measured 16 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/truestepanov.
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.
