Channel
@uxdigest
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Handles named that no longer answer · Cite this entry
3,800subscribers
-9 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1001401670670 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @uxdigest |
| Created | Between 1 April 2019 and 31 August 2021— 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 | 5 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/uxdigest |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 09:23 | 3,800 | -2 |
| 9 Aug 2026, 03:53 | 3,802 | -5 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 11:02 | 3,807 | -2 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 04:31 | 3,809 | no change |
| 6 Aug 2026, 02:34 | 3,809 | first reading |
21 posts held, back to 22 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 4 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 2 of 11 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 | 21 (22 June 2026 – 7 August 2026) |
| Views total | 2,221 |
| Reactions total | 2 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 8 Aug 2026, 06:11 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.
4 reactions across 4 posts, in 2 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 75.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 3 | 75.0% | |
| 🕊 | 1 | 25.0% |
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 4 of the 21 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 4reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 21 most recent posts we hold, published 22 June 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.
Designing Flow in SSX 3: A Cognitive Psychology & Game UX Analysis A cognitive psychology analysis of SSX 3 shows how the game sustains flow through a risk/reward trick system (adrenaline → Ubertricks → Super Uber), adaptive audio that gives real-time feedback, and a progressive mountain structure that balances challenge with skill. It satisfies Self-Determination Theory (competence, autonomy, relatedness) through tr…
🔥1
The Psychology of Why Confirmation Dialogues Get Ignored Confirmation dialogs are a psychological failure—they force a slow, analytical System 2 response onto a fast, automatic System 1 workflow, meaning users click through them without reading, driven by habit and the desire to resolve an interruption. The fix isn't better copy or redder buttons, but designing for reversibility (undo, soft deletes) and using 'good f…
NNG: No New Name Has Replaced “UX” Despite ongoing debates about renaming the field, a survey of 604 professionals found that "UX" remains the dominant, spontaneous term (appearing in 70% of responses), while alternatives like "experience design" or "human-centered design" are fragmented and rare. The data suggests that job roles shape terminology (e.g., product managers say "product"), but no single alternative has …
Transitioning from Graphic Design to UX Moving from graphic design to UX doesn’t mean starting over. Most core skills are directly transferable and serve as a strong foundation to become a great UX designer Prototyping: The Enterprise Software Delusion - We Design for the Buyer and Blame the User Enterprise software fails because buyers (executives) buy for compliance, but users get bloated interfaces designed for a…
Agile UX and its associated challenges Don Norman's critique of Agile UX: "Norman's Law" — on the day a project is announced, it's already late and over budget — because Agile sacrifices user research for coding, when research should be a continuous practice, not a phase. The fix: continuous research, Design Sprints to compress understanding before coding, and reframing procrastination as "time to think" — building f…
UX and NPS Benchmarks of Health Insurance Websites (2026) A 2026 benchmark of 8 health insurance sites found SUPR-Q scores dropped from the 67th percentile in 2018 to the 30th — below average — with negative NPS (-14%) and usability at the 21st percentile. Top frustrations: finding providers, claims info, and slow performance; users struggle to find vital information when they need help most NNG: A Concrete Definiti…
The UX Secret Hidden Inside Human Memory A deep look at how human memory shapes UX: the "remembering self" (Kahneman's peak-end rule) dominates evaluation — the most intense moment (peak) and the ending carry disproportionate weight, while duration is largely ignored. Key implications: design for recognition (not recall), chunk information for working memory (~4 items), and run a "memory audit" — users remember peak …
Understanding Alpha Inflation Alpha inflation occurs when running multiple statistical tests at p < .05 — 20 tests give a 64% chance of at least one false positive, not 5%. Methods to control it (Bonferroni, Tukey) reduce false alarms but increase misses (Type II errors), so the decision depends on whether a false alarm or a missed real difference is more costly in your context Why Technical Context Matters in UX Re…
Ethnography: The UX Research Skill Ethnography in UX means observing everyday behavior and asking why, not just asking users what they want — as shown in a gift-giving project where younger adults personalized gifts (identity) while older adults preserved traditions (responsibility). The lesson: products exist inside social relationships (Venmo emojis, Spotify playlists), and observing workarounds can reveal features…
🔥1
The Reversal of Adaptation AI still feels hard even as it gets smarter because we're adding intelligence to systems built on old assumptions — forcing users to "translate" their situations into system language instead of systems adapting to humans. The key idea is "The Reversal of Adaptation": for decades humans adapted to software; now software can adapt to humans, but we're automating the old relationship instead o…
Taming Chaos Key lessons from a webinar on sustainable systems: understand your environment before changing it, break changes into small steps, document to create shared language, allow controlled chaos for creativity, and treat systems as living things that need continuous feedback. The best system isn't the most organized one — it's the one people actually want to use NNG: The 5 Qualities of Site-Specific AI Chatb…
Why User Feedback Isn’t Always the Answer User feedback is a rough signal, not a finished instruction — users are excellent reporters of experience but poor designers of solutions. Treat feedback as a starting point, not an end: separate observation from interpretation, look for emotion underneath complaints, triangulate stated preference vs. actual behavior vs. underlying need, and remember the silent majority who n…
Showing the 12 most recent of 21 posts we hold for @uxdigest. 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 — 706,896 of 1,176,251entries 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.
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.
@uxdigest named 1 handle 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.
References a handle that is not a live channel — we have no record it ever was one.
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.
“UX Digest ⭕️” (@uxdigest), 3,800 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/uxdigest.
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.