Every great product starts with one goal: Make people's work a little simpler.
🔥4

Channel
@vaiz_app
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Telegram's recommendations · Cite this entry
4,358subscribers
+0 since we began measuring on 12 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002222988391 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @vaiz_app |
| Created | Between 1 June 2024 and 30 September 2024— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated. |
| First recorded | 12 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 12 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 2 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 12 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/vaiz_app |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 12 Aug 2026, 09:32 | 4,358 | no change |
| 12 Aug 2026, 08:31 | 4,358 | first reading |
10 posts held, back to 2 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 1 pageof 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.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 21 July 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 10 (2 January 2026 – 21 July 2026) |
| Views total | 586 |
| Reactions total | 20 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 12 Aug 2026, 08:31 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.
53 reactions across 10 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 34.0% of them.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🔥 | 18 | 34.0% | |
| 👍 | 16 | 30.2% | |
| ❤ | 12 | 22.6% | |
| 😁 | 5 | 9.43% | |
| 🏆 | 1 | 1.89% | |
| 🤓 | 1 | 1.89% |
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 10 of the 10 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 53reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 10 most recent posts we hold, published 2 January 2026 to 21 July 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.
Every great product starts with one goal: Make people's work a little simpler.
🔥4
Where does this live? Who's responsible? What's changed? What should I do next? 🥲We've all been there. So we built Vaiz. 🥹
❤3🏆1🔥1
The most expensive work is often the work nobody planned. We spend years optimizing execution. Here are 3 practical ways to reduce operational overhead. Spend less time on work around the work. Just do the work 😎
❤3🔥1
Vaiz 2.90 is live 🚀 This release streamlines everyday workflows: ✨ more powerful bulk actions 🔍 richer search results with board and project context 🔔 improved task and security notifications 🛡️ safer file handling and editor improvements Explore everything in the latest changelog
🔥3❤2👍2
Sometimes you walk into a company and say, “Let’s make everything transparent.” Then you see how things actually work and go, “Okay. Maybe transparency needs some limits.” Rings a bell? 😁
😁5👍1🤓1
We reward real feedback. Literally. If you’re using Vaiz and something feels off, missing, or could work better — tell us. Record a short Loom or write a quick review with your thoughts or feature requests and send it to us by email or right here on LinkedIn. We don’t let good feedback go unnoticed. Merch included 🙂 A real example: the badge you see here exists because a user sent us a short video explaining what …
🔥4❤3👍2
Our take on work tools 🤔 Many task trackers were designed around someone else’s business logic. You don’t just use them — you adapt to them. Tasks become the goal. Metrics replace outcomes. Closing tickets starts to matter more than solving real problems. We’re building Vaiz differently. Our goal is not to turn your work into a system optimized for reporting. It’s to give teams a workspace that adapts to how they …
👍4
Distributed teams lose up to 25% of their time to lost context 📉 Research on remote and knowledge work shows a clear pattern: when decisions are spread across chats and meetings, teams spend 15–25% of their working time switching context and recovering information. Another 20–30% goes into re-clarifying things that were already discussed. What consistently helps is keeping decisions close to the work itself. When …
👍3❤1🔥1
📌 Meeting Bingo: Corporate Edition Ever been on a meeting where you can predict half the phrases before anyone speaks? Here’s a classic one. Check off every line you’ve heard on your calls. First to get bingo owes the team… fewer meetings next week. If this card feels too familiar, it’s usually a sign that clarity lives in meetings instead of the workflow. We’re building Vaiz so progress stays visible without repe…
👍2🔥2
🔴 We canceled daily standups for a week. Productivity went up by 18%. We ran a simple experiment at Vaiz: fewer meetings, more shared visibility. The result was more completed tasks, fewer missed deadlines, and faster handling of blockers. The key insight: more visibility means fewer meetings. When work is transparent and always up to date, sync happens naturally. 🙌🏻 Want to try this with your team? Sign up for Va…
👍2🔥2
Showing the 10 most recent of 10 posts we hold for @vaiz_app. 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.
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.
This channel appears in 1 seed channel's Telegram-generated recommendation list in total. Each is Telegram’s list for THAT channel, not this one — see how this is measured.
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.
“VAIZ” (@vaiz_app), 4,358 subscribers as measured 12 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/vaiz_app.
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.